jsqaure99

true say, good example.
9 X+ J$ z" }- \; rby the way all i wanna say is that article is very naive.# _; I) o1 Y. U  q9 m' Z
trying to use our limited "smartness" to guess god's will.! M: N/ H4 F6 A' L7 X
no offence but i think whoever wrote it is stupid and him/her WILL SEE.

jsqaure99

TO sk﹕5 b( D% x$ k' |" \- s/ F+ a" W
NO OFFENCE
  }  z! F7 c4 T7 T2 K& z6 u但請問如果我整容整到同你一樣
2 ^9 Z, i6 f9 e5 o9 {0 r係咪DNA都會同你一樣呢
4 r: o2 X9 Z& m8 l) mIMAGE又係咪解DNA呢/ J3 y% X" {1 x+ h2 E0 o& I
IMAGE又係咪淨係解樣呢
/ M" E% g+ c' a0 x0 E我唔知! B5 [# l! d" d; k4 e; n
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‘﹐
  @2 g5 n6 P" n" n會唔會覺得未夠班呢! d6 `. r: r! \5 ~
人不能夠解釋神﹐就話神係假﹐係心靈上既托附9 A+ m' X  ^% B+ I2 \
但係而家連挪亞方舟都慍到喇+ Y/ Q+ T4 r% u- k6 j# y3 R
又點解釋
/ ^, O- e* b0 e, W& |1 d5 D$ B7 N
$ x7 A& E/ K! ]6 v: m0 C5 e" l1 S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2 y' g% [4 l; J/ ?
以為係大茶飯﹐點知連點CONTACT個網主都慍唔到
$ h. W% _! R2 P, M家常便飯有興趣去睇下佢既無知喇 .\

jsqaure99

反面教材; k; Q* k! X/ Q1 b
講得好
/ x1 k* X# j8 k$ a仲有D潑婦罵街FEEL添

jsqaure99

哈哈
5 H/ _; \# c& s% {1 ]我個人比夠口臭唔好意思

jsqaure99

Originally posted by ilove---you at 2005-4-7 07:01 PM:2 F5 n& f% T; y7 B% \+ D( ?5 x$ U
1 p/ a" _' p8 ^

2 l, Y* Q: k( y5 |9 T8 k証據...係要証實左既先叫証據
) k' k* K4 U$ C* K' }
( u% t$ ^' M: o6 y4 k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!

) C( P& m1 [) P" B/ q( U2 e( M! ~, ~; @. {7 ^

9 V+ S9 u) w- W0 a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﹗