> Lord Soccer wrote:

> do people really need a religion to tell u what to believe, can u not think for urself?

i find it hard to believe that God created everything, he is just part of a religion that was made up, like many other religions out there that were made up, many have their own gods, maybe they created everything, i think not.

many of the greatest minds in history were religious people; while you may not beleive in a god, dont delude yourself into believing that the reason you dont beleive in a god is a result of your intelligence, IQ, education, or ability to think for yourself...

"a necessity that was needed"

redundancy noted.

> Justinian I wrote:

> > Morbo the Annihilator wrote:

> It makes sense.>

God makes sense too

You mean the belief that a zombie whose father was a god, can save us all because a woman that was made out of a mans rib, who was made in image of the aforementioned god, ate an apple off a tree, because a talking snake convinced her. Perfect sense

> Ehawk wrote:

> no, i argue that religion was a social development that increased the rate of morality.  in the long term, humans will develop morally on their own, i simply think religion was a way to assist peoples' immediate needs at the time. this resulted in a chain of events that allowed for growth and prosperity.  keep in mind what life may have been like for the people during the time of religions' beginings, we needed that.

Now, in 2009, i think in most devolped nations, we have a level of moral and technological development where we do not need the ideas that kept societies alive. Truthfully, i wonder how some religions lasted as long as they did.

"Religion's are just like horses, nice to have around, but mabye its time you get a car"

my bad, i was mixing moral with morale...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1fGkFuHIu0

Ok I watched that and I see anthropology is still up to its old tricks

1.  Are they saying that 2 distinct separate human species arose out of chance at the same time? That's a pretty frickin huge coincidence.  I mean I know they gloss over it in this video "OK well um yeah see Neanderthals? Not homo sapiens. So you're wrong that humans don't evlove. OK now forget that, let's talk fusion."  I'm like, OK wtf perfesser, you're saying that two totally separate species of hairy-ass knuckledraggers decided to indepedently bunch off into upright walking, spearchucking painters with recognizably human cultures, within 1 million years of each other? I thought spontaneous speciaziation was the sort of ludicrous improbability that marked a Jesus freak?  Conscious design by Allah and Buddha over the objection of Jesus Christ is actually MORE plausible than that scenario.

2. I saw reference to "estimated timeframe of deviation"--not that Saganite canard!  Oi, egghead- you DON'T have measured intervals of genetic upheaval, THEREFORE you can't make a clock out of them!

3.  An ERV might very well hit a chimp and human at the same spot in the chromosone sequence--they share a good deal of the chromosone sequence and for most of history shared the same environment, so they'd have a better chance of, say, both eating raw pig meat and getting something nasty that lingered in their oh-so-simian balls.