>>110
I'm not saying that we shouldn't believe in things there is no evidence of. As we shouldn't. I'm just saying that we shouldn't disbelieve in things there isn't any evidence of.
I used the example of germs before, I think in this thread or another of the redcream threads: Disbelieving something from lack of evidence is like disbelieving germs before the invention of the microscope.
Every few centuries or so we discover something further out in the universe - we used to think the sky was the outskirt of the universe. Then the solar system. Then the galaxy. What we believe is the end of the universe to me makes more sense now, as it is built into the big bang theory, but I still think we should be skeptical of whether or not we really know what is out there, or whether we really know anything at all.
There is a quote I like, forget by who, but it goes, "Follow those who seek the truth, but doubt those that find it."
>>122
I'm sorry, but you're a lost cause. The bible is a long book. In any book that long you will find statements to come true. With a book that long and vague you can apply any section to anything. Especially since the most popular translation is such nonsense.
And yes, Childbirth is only painful to humans, because our neocortex requires a larger skull, from birth. If our pelvises were to allow any more room for a larger skull to pass though, they would have to disjoint, which would make us very fragile. Funnily enough, this comes from recent evolution.
I'm not that against religion, but I'm against people like
>>122 who miss the point of it completely. The Adam and Eve Story isn't telling us where we are from - it is telling us that we all are one, that we are all related - as we are: we all share a common ancestor. When you take a religion's folklore literally and not for the morals the stories wish to portray, you are a fool.