 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Last night, Richard Dawkins was interviewed on Comedy Central’s The Colbert Report, and again mentioned the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
You can’t disprove the Flying Spaghetti Monster. – Richard Dawkins
The FSM comment is at about 1:50.
[youtube]RA9EiSJaXww[/youtube]
The Church of the FSM is always looking for content. Details here
The Church is funded entirely by your purchases of FSM merchandise. Thank you for your support.
An elaborate spoof on Intelligent Design, The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is neither too elaborate nor too spoofy to succeed in nailing the fallacies of ID. It's even wackier than Jonathan Swift's suggestion that the Irish eat their children as a way to keep them from being a burden, and it may offend just as many people, but Henderson, described elsewhere as a 25-year-old "out-of-work physics major," puts satire to the same serious use that Swift did. Oh, yes, it is very funny. -- Scientific American
Purchase from Amazon.com
Add these buttons to your site:
Bobby's Blog
Contact Bobby: Contact Me
 |
 |
Words of the wise.
RAmen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I think I love Mr. Dawkins.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
He is my hero!
“i am a very big fan of id for man made things, i am not a very big fan of id for natural things”-another good quote from mr. dawkins
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You can’t disprove the Flying Spaghetti Monster because he exists. Dawkins should have said that all gods are false except our god. He gets no strippers or beer.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I wonder if Dr. Dawkins is the Antipasta?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Fr.
Dr.Dawkins? Are you sure that it is not Saint or Sir Richard Dawkins.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I was very suprised to hear Mr. Dawkins say that, and acually stopped what i was doing, and looked up at the screen. Alright more regognition, and the Colbert Reports 1 year aniversary! RAmen!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I love the Colbert Report (silent T! silent T!)he makes the utmost of sense if you don’t take him literaly, besides that his guests are alway so confused…( my computer won’t load the movie at the moment so i can’t tell if Sir Dawkins is confused or not) anyway LONG LIVE THE GREAT PASTA!
RAmen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Why all this discussion? It’s just a waste of time. I mean, if it isn’t obvious to you that the Flying Spaghetti Monster created all that we see, you’re just kind of slow and not worth talking to
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Ncik666
Only about what a p…chinko machine was. I don’t know how that is spelt as I don’t think they are that common here in Oz either.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Woot it works now! YES SIR DAWKINS WINS!!! thats one of the few that actually do. They usually just sputter at what a redneck steven seems. Dawkins is now my hero!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Wohooo! Yay for saint Dawkins and public indorsement!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Haha! But I CAN disprove the Flying “Spaghetti” Monster, because he came to me in a vision last night and told me that he wasn’t in fact made of spaghetti and meatballs but rather a 5-cheese lasagna! And he told me so personally, so it must be true! All hail the Flying Lasagna Monster!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Get real, Susan. You saw the pictures, and that was no lasagna. What came to you last night was not a vision but rather some crack/cocaine.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Susan I believe you haven’t read the “I’d Really Rather You Didn’ts”
7.I’d Really Rather You Didn’t Go Around Telling People I Talk To You. You’re Not That Interesting. Get Over Yourself. And I Told You To Love Your Fellow Man, Can’t You Take A Hint?
RAmen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
That Colbert is a terrible interviewer. It’s all about him. Dawkins was trying to make an argument, although an easy and tired one, but he couldn’t get three words in. Somehow Colbert gets these high profile guests on his show and just wastes their time. Sometime’s its funny, other times its frustrating to watch. As for Dawkins, what he is saying is nothing new. He’s just louder than the rest of them, and he has somehow made a carreer out of it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Careful faghettini,
You may find yourself circled be sharks in a few minutes. Your right he wasn’t given a chance to say much but am certain he knew that would be on when he went on. I think he came out on top myself.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’ve seen his movie, and to be honest, there is not much there. He goes and finds some religious fanatics that believe all kinds of garbage, gets into a little argument on camera knowing that these people can’t be reasoned with, and gets them to spew out some nonsense. Then he goes around to some religious sites in Israel, talks about all the wars that religion has caused, visits some religious sites and asks the caretakers.. “you don’t really believe that, do you?”, shows a priest having an unholy argument on his cell phone…
It holds about the same weight as Michael Moore’s propaganda. What I’m saying is that he doesn’t break any new ground. He just tries a little harder to cause outrage among Christians, who are far too easy to rile up in the first place.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I believe that is probably just promo for his new book aimed at the widest audience possible. One of his other books “The Selfih Gene” has been acclaimed by eminent scientists in all the biological fields. i.e. Biology, Miicrobiology, Molecular Biology ect. Some of the theories (or hypotheses) in it have also been adopted by many.
I haven’t read “The God Delusion” so I won’t comment. But in these fields, as in most other fields of science, that sort of acclaim and respect isn’t given casually. There is a lot of competition for recognition out there.
RAmen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Apologies for leaving out the zoologists.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
my typo
That is “The Selfish Gene”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Shellfish gene surely
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Oh man Colbert’s show is pathetic. He was so much better on the Daily Show with John Stewart. And I agree with the point that Dawkins isn’t too special after all. Everyone can think of the things he says simply by using their brains. You don’t have to be a superbrain to have a strong opinion. Wake up the masses and spread pastafarianism, brothers and sisters!
RAmen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Yes!
This man knows what he is talking about.
The thing is, God cannot be disproven, although he cannot be proven either.
This man clearly just reads too many websites for his own good.
Flying Spaghetti Monster is the messiah.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You really have to question his arrogance. He is playing to pop culture. Society is full of ignorant people who are looking for reasons to criticise religion, and it is these people who are rallying around him. There is nothing new in his “research”. His points have all been made even long before he started his career. He won’t bring anyone to the light with his arguments. The people that cheer him on and the people that quote him are just as guilty of not thinking for themselves as anyone who swears by their religion. There is a whole lot of blind devotion on both sides. The last two generations of Americans have been bred to be complacent and ignorant. The average person can’t tell the difference between news, science and propaganda anymore.
Whether or not evolution was the way it went, these people haven’t read up on it. They don’t know facts or details of how it happened. They take for granted that the somebody else has found the evidence, and the only arguments they hear from the other side are from radicals, which they then shoot down as providing no proof.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
faghettini
“……..The average person can’t tell the difference between news, science and propaganda anymore……”
Hence the populist way of getting their attention and getting them to “actually read the book” instead of just making general assumptions based on a few sentences in the media they will be exposed to over- simplifying the ideas.
Besides publishing companies decide usually decide on the promotion agenda. I think you’ll find Dawkins wasn’t particuarly impressed with the video.
RAmen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
>Susan Oct 20th, 2006 at 12:50 am
>Haha! But I CAN disprove the Flying “Spaghetti†Monster, because he came to me in a >vision last night and told me that he wasn’t in fact made of spaghetti and meatballs but >rather a 5-cheese lasagna! And he told me so personally, so it must be true! All hail >the Flying Lasagna Monster!
Susan My Sister: I too have seen the vision of the 5 Cheese Mother Lasagna. Welcome to her soft and cheesy embrace.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Praise Thor God of Thunder. I KNOW He exists because I fell on my head and saw a vision.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Does anybody else here get the impression that Prof. Dawkins was wasting his valuable time talking this moron?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Sorry, I just read the other posts and realise thet do!
Ramen.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Agreed, although I would question the value of Prof. Dawkins’ time.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
OMFSM! Stephen Colbert is a satirical genius! He acts like he is uber-conservative to make FUN of uber-conservatives. Haven’t you ever seen “the word”? He is so over the top conservative, I thought that it is OBVIOUS that he is satirizing the conservative right. Ever notice how most of his guests are liberal? He is a GENIUS!!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I personally liked the interview. The whole point of the Colbert Report is to mock real news shows and “attacks” guests just as Bill O’Reilly and others do. Its Sattire, plain and simple. If it frustrates anyone, thats kind of sad. Its a joke after all, kind of like a certain deity with a noodly appendage.
Anywho, I thought Dawsons points were very interesting and I’m excited to read his new book. The concept that he broke no new ground isn’ relevant becasue no one breaks new ground now a days in the field of Religion. Its a dying field so to speak.
~Ravenbleu
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Oh, come on! you people prob don’t know what Colbert is about if you are complaining about his style. It’s clear even Dawkins was playing into his game.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
that was frickin hilarious! i’ve read several of his books and enjoyed them mightly, but this is the first time i’ve seen dawkins speak and i liked it. this was also my first visit to you sight and as a closet pirate meself, methinks i’ll be a convertin’ to the pasta view.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Colbert, like Jon Stewart, never learned the difference between wit and wise-assery. The latter is easy. Wit is hard. It isn’t hard to do a wise-ass-expression camera take and wait till everyone starts laughing. Wit means risking maybe you won’t get the laugh.
Tom Lehrer–he was witty. Mark Russell is wise-ass. The Onion is witty. And sometimes also wise-ass.
But you don’t get to stay on mainstream corporate media feeds unless you pitch to the lowest common denominator, while telling them they’re the smartest people in the world. Advertising revenues are plotted and transacted using statistical measures of central tendency, and that means how many eyes get delivered to a particular show. Marketing people have this all worked out–take a graduate degree in mass communications research, and you’ll learn all the tactics and strategies that turn broadcasting into a vast wasteland peopled by wingnuts, dipsticks, and idiots of all ilk. The approaches are the same ones used in religion. And religious broadcasting.
This is why much wittier people, like CBC’s Mary Walsh or Colin Mochrie, or BBC’s Jennifer Saunders, aren’t invited to do Comedy Central political humor. Mary Walsh could chew Stewart, Colbert, the whole lot, up and spit ‘em out in ANY of her razor-tongued Maritimes personae.
I did see Colbert do a guest stint on “Whose Line” a few years ago, and he was amusing. Not funny. Amusing. And kind of nice. Collaborated well with the other comedians, but was more of a beta than a Colin Mochrie or Wayne Brady alpha trickster.
What I don’t understand is why people don’t realize that O’Reilly, Limbaugh, and that insane woman with the rictus for a mouth ARE satire. Like Mark Twain said, the US rarely, if ever, turns out good satirists because our nation itself is satire. If people on the “left” would develop a sense of humor, these idiots would be laughed right out of business. But no. We take them seriously.
Which is precisely why Cheney and Rove et al. set them up there. To draw fire.
Dawkins is OK…but doesn’t understand the rhetorical form known as the “pathetic fallacy.” This deficiency in language education leads him to some hilarious, imprecise statements about how the world works.
I’m much more fond of Niles Eldridge, who is no stylist, but a much better atheist than Gould ever was. Current favorite writer on these topics (evolution and religion) has got to be Pascal Boyer, though at times even he slops up his rhetoric with really poor choices of metaphor.
Getting free of metaphor and rhetoric in science and reason is a topic all its own. This is why mathematicians like to believe they’ve created (they’d say discovered) the perfect language for such things. Though it seems pretty clear to me that math is an expression of the human mind’s feature of pattern recognition, and generation of patterns where there aren’t any (one of the psychoneural features that also leads to superstition, and religion).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
what happened to video? anyone have a copy? I needs my video hit of His noodly goodness.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Wit for wit’s sake is boring and about as useful as alliteration. Style and skill are wasted if the topic/subject/art form are not relevant, genuinely expressive, or actually useful. (Example, I don’t care if Sting, for instance, didn’t have the power and range of a classically trained opera singer, (many of) his songs were great.) Jon and Steven do a great job bringing topics of the day to light in a fun and provocative manner.
.
The most impresive thing about Jon and Steven is how they handle guests who are definitely in the other camp.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@ All pastafarians, atheists, humanists, Brights, and free-thinkers,
.
Ahoy there!
.
I’m copying this post onto a few threads because I’d like as many people as possible to notice it. (Bobby, if you should read this, is there any chance of a new thread?)
.
You might have spotted on these pages Richard Dawkins’ high-profile references to the FSM, unmasking himself as at the very least an honorary pastafarian and certainly a friend of pirates the world over. He’s done his bit for the FSM – here’s a chance to return the favour.
.
His many books on evolution and, in particular, his recent book ‘The God Delusion’ have influenced a lot of people here.
.
Anyway, here in Britain, one of our national newspapers, The Daily Telegraph, in conjunction with Morgan Stanley, is running the third annual ‘Great Britons’ awards. People are invited to vote for the British person they think has been the most ‘Great’ (somehow) in each of seven categories.
.
Me salty guts tell me that a hearty lot of pirates’ll want to support their own and put their cutlasses behind Richard Dawkins, by far and away Britain’s noodliest man of 2006, and doubtless also he of the biggest meatballs.
.
I nominated him earlier today, in the ‘Campaigning’ category. You can add your nominations by visiting greatbritons.org. It takes barely a minute and might help one of the FSM’s finest sea-dogs to the gain the legendary status he deserves. You can even put in a 50-word explanation of why he gets your vote, which would probably strengthen the case (if you’ve anything to say). If you’d like to know more about him, try visiting richarddawkins.net.
.
Douglas Adams fans might like to note that Dawkins and Adams were close friends and that Adams credited Dawkins’ books ‘The Blind Watchmaker’ and ‘The Selfish Gene’ as having influenced his reasoning towards atheism. Dawkins wrote a ‘Lament for Douglas’ immediately after Adams’ death, and delivered a eulogy at his funeral.
.
I’ve a second reason for recommending this. The Telegraph ran an article by regular columnist Charles Moor on Saturday that dismissed ‘The God Delusion’ as ‘fashionable’ and gave a very selective, wilfully interpreted representation of its content. It’s a good newspaper but pretty thoroughly conservative – not an obvious place for pastafarianism to thrive. In light of this, I think it doubly worthwhile to demonstrate the strength of support that Richard enjoys among the world’s many pirates to the Telegraph.
.
(Note – I’ve left http:// off the website addresses in this post, as the first couple of times I tried to post it, it got stuck awaiting moderation. Hopefully this’ll help.)
.
Nominations for the awards continue until November 24th. If ye can spare a second of plunderin’ time, set a course for greatbritons.org and add your cannon to a broadside for free thinking and the FSM!
.
May His Noodly Appendage be upon ye all.
.
RAmen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I don’t think there is anything wrong with being a wise ass. I don’t watch Jon and Stephen for wit, I watch them for the wise assery; I don’t think there is anything wrong with that; its good fun.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
My Chemical Romance’s Myspace Page
well let me just say…fsm and mcr make a wicked combo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
After seeing and hearing all the crazy and depressing news of the day, it’s refreshing to just spend 1 hour watching Jon and Stephen rip through all that and expose the inner absurdity. I do believe there is some inner truth to humor, and it helps me get through the week.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
RAmen!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The Colbert video on You-Tube was removed per request by Comedy Central. Steven opened his show with his comments on the subject.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You can still see the video at Richard Dawkins’s site http://richarddawkins.net/home
.
Comedy Central will probably ruin that too. For a comedy network, the suits running the place don’t have much of a sense of humor.
.
OEJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links:
Like or Dislike:
0 
0