It’s not accurate to say that FSM attracts intelligent followers by its nature. Genuinely intelligent people don’t have time for the joke, so what we get is people who know nothing and want a place to mock religion, as well as people who have read up a bit on evolution or have read up on Dawkins and have a few points on which they can argue.
-f
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
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 License. This means you're free to use the content but not sell it. More Details |
“Dr. Michael Martin Nov 21st, 2006 at 2:12 pm
Dawkins who?”
.
And you claim to be a Dr? I think you should check your foot for bullet holes…
Don’t bring up the Doktor again, spider, speaking his name may cause him to manifest!
Oh dear! Both the BLR and the dokta have been mentioned on threads in the past 12hrs or so. That can’t bode well at all. :(
We are…surrounded with…signs and portents…
Uh so intelligent people can’t have a laugh?
It attracts people as any other religeons do just people here and there…
Who the fuck says because you inteligent you have to use your brain properly! I mean hell I know that I can do some amazing art but I sit and waste my time on the internet.
Just because your ‘intelligent’ it does not mean you know how to use it properly.
For goodness ake if you had that much intelligence and you couldn’t let a little out on a luagh you would truly implode.
-Just a little silly girl laughing at a serious little person
O! I see now, I have been so stupid all my life, damn. I can’t be a cleaver person because I have sense of humour. I mean sense of humour (time for a joke) is clearly a limiting factor of intelligence. Its just silly to suggest that any one who has ever spent a second of there life finding something amusing could be inelegant. They should just spend there time being inelegant, not doing anything light hearted. Naturally I can not form any of my own opinions, I have merely read up on Dawkins and Darwin (who clearly spends his time preaching that FSM is god) and have never formulated my own opinions on religion. No! I haven’t!
I don’t think it’s fair to say that ALL pastasfarians are intelligent, because there are always some slow-coaches in the mix somewhere, people don’t become pastafarians quite for that reason.
People become pastafarians because the intent of every aspect of pastafarianism aims at being positive. It encourages tolerance, goodwill, dressing up like a pirate to please his noodliness (and because it is so damn fun!), preaches of a delightful sounding heaven and encourages that the deity is one that just wants to be happy with his people.
You don’t need to be intelligent to be pastafarian, but I assure you that you don’t have to be stupid either. That’s not the point.
f said “First of all, those aren’t the rule. They are the exception. Thus the special section devoted to them under “Academic Endorsements.” Are we reading the same forums here? Tell me they are not full of morons.
.
Second, what is their PhD in? Chemistry? English Lit? Their expertise is narrow. They know the subject of their thesis quite well. Nobody can legitimately question that. But in a discussion about religion, their opinion is no more enlightened, no more informed, and no more valuable than yours, piratey joe.
.
If you had a seven year attention span, you too could have a PhD in any subject you choose. And unless your chosen subject was directly related, you would still have nothing to tell me about religion and your endorsement would be as useless then as it is now.
It may have been said before but (to quote dawkin’s uni proffessor on theology) “I have grave doubt to whether it is actually a subject”