jsqaure99

true say, good example.
7 u3 Y: g5 a% A! l4 V; H, Dby the way all i wanna say is that article is very naive.
0 a, [1 f/ ~8 ^" J- ?8 }: rtrying to use our limited "smartness" to guess god's will.
1 p) b. J# m* ^: j' xno offence but i think whoever wrote it is stupid and him/her WILL SEE.

jsqaure99

TO sk﹕
5 z: W+ H* G$ `/ E1 t/ |6 XNO OFFENCE 4 P5 e5 l# @* [/ P. }: C! Y- ~+ V
但請問如果我整容整到同你一樣- c: b4 N( m1 M0 b6 P* ~; h  }
係咪DNA都會同你一樣呢+ ]* ^7 _4 }8 U" O! X
IMAGE又係咪解DNA呢; d8 m! u8 P7 G- ~- \; g& e6 t& [
IMAGE又係咪淨係解樣呢* h: @' K5 @1 F% e: }2 ]
我唔知4 k: g0 n2 E2 u4 ~, y
但係人用現今不完整既科學﹐好似DNA既理論黎攻激神既”創世‘﹐% }- u$ ^4 u5 ~( j7 y; T
會唔會覺得未夠班呢, A2 \! R0 R6 \0 X8 s
人不能夠解釋神﹐就話神係假﹐係心靈上既托附
' v6 S) W, q7 X/ r2 _# a& I3 b但係而家連挪亞方舟都慍到喇% `! ^' i8 c/ w' q9 Q: F
又點解釋
: |- w. X* {6 L- _; p$ z. z
7 H( V" O. B3 M# B& K0 p仲有果個網址我已經去過﹐寫網人只係一個唔識解經既人(什至忽略左好多好多既DETAIL)﹐佢既網址簡直不值一看。

jsqaure99

我就敗興而回. y. D9 ?( s; e4 A9 g1 Z
以為係大茶飯﹐點知連點CONTACT個網主都慍唔到
% f, d3 c+ Q# R7 r家常便飯有興趣去睇下佢既無知喇 .\

jsqaure99

反面教材4 o: M" Q2 J) e# }; f
講得好; Z, y5 G: s! |3 M
仲有D潑婦罵街FEEL添

jsqaure99

哈哈6 M& A# G6 e# `. `# x
我個人比夠口臭唔好意思

jsqaure99

Originally posted by ilove---you at 2005-4-7 07:01 PM:
, n- `2 P8 V0 a/ M2 Q) m/ s8 \* P$ M/ E0 y# I8 S7 }% N
5 s; h6 @: W/ d
証據...係要証實左既先叫証據
. C# x! o, S9 }, q% \) [: q3 `8 {" `- [$ S- W' c7 Z  m2 S
用眼去睇下個隆就話係...又唔做下"碳14"確定下年分??? 見到d對自己有利既所謂証據就認屎認屁認唔切...悲哀!

' |# [* V% d' n% W# w" \

/ X" z+ P7 Y( @. ~3 P: k$ ~/ H8 c1 h! r, S" s
唔係想話你﹐不個你經常用錯既EXAMPLE同經證實既謠言黎BACKUP自己會唔會唔好意思﹖當然大家希望多些人發言﹐但請你先做RESEARCH﹗