For my part, my Christian beliefs are almost entirely based on the eyewitness testimony of Paul the apostle. Why do I believe him? Well, for one thing – and it’s only one of my reasons – he seems sincere. And that’s something I can’t say about Pastafarians; they most certainly do not seem sincere. I know you won’t like that kind of evidence – eyewitness testimony I mean – because it demands a subjective judgment and is not easily amenable to scientific investigation. You can’t quantify sincerity. But we do make many important decisions based on this kind of evidence – whether to buy a certain product, who to vote for and who to trust. Members of a jury make life and death decisions based on such evidence. So it’s a kind of evidence we have to take seriously. Furthermore, the fact that Paul was killed because of the things he claimed to have seen seems to at least rule out the possibility that he was joking. So that’s some supporting evidence, again of a kind that Pastafarianism doesn’t have.
So I really can’t identify with people who see faith and evidence as opposites. For me, faith is not about believing something in the absence of evidence. Rather, it’s the judgment you make about the evidence you do have. It’s the risk you take after you’ve considered that evidence.