在內容方麵，你這個非民科 發現什麽問題麽？

這篇文章是否觸動到你的陳舊觀點了麽？看起來你比較興奮。究竟是哪一些啊？

 

所有跟帖： 

• As I said, I am not a 非民科, I am a 民科 just like you. -Florence1- ♂ (0 bytes) () 09/22/2015 postreply 10:04:23

• 原來你對本文內容並沒有異議.其實，我想看看用事實和數據對此文的質疑。 -藍山雀- ♀ (0 bytes) () 09/22/2015 postreply 10:05:44

• I am not a biologist. I am only curious -Florence1- ♂ (92 bytes) () 09/22/2015 postreply 10:15:19

• same here. -藍山雀- ♀ (0 bytes) () 09/22/2015 postreply 10:16:59

• Maybe Professional biologist have better -Florence1- ♂ (55 bytes) () 09/22/2015 postreply 10:18:54

• 沒人讓你信。 -藍山雀- ♀ (71 bytes) () 09/22/2015 postreply 11:59:47

• I choose not to read a book written by a amateur -Florence1- ♂ (0 bytes) () 09/22/2015 postreply 13:08:10

• But I only read books writen by 非民科 -Florence1- ♂ (0 bytes) () 09/22/2015 postreply 10:05:19

• 看了很多卻沒有自己觀點的，豈不是機器人？ -藍山雀- ♀ (0 bytes) () 09/22/2015 postreply 13:22:34

• I am not 機器人because -Florence1- ♂ (125 bytes) () 09/22/2015 postreply 13:30:52