Problem, Spaghetti and pasta didn’t exist till the 500 - 900 AD. Google it knucklehead. Funny, yet it still does not address the problem of irreducible complexity. Too bad :( He missed the whole point.
-LeapofFaith
Connect with other Pastafarians
Propaganda Buttons
Add these buttons to your site:
RSS Feeds
Support the Cause
The Church is funded entirely by your purchases of FSM merchandise. Thank you for your support.
Purchase the Gospel
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
@ Pasta Parmesan: One of the arguments of ID founder Behe is that the evolutionists’ “give me the cell and i’ll give you the eye” notion is unacceptable because a photosensitive cell is 90% of the way to an eye in itself. what he gets at is that Cells are themselves far too complex to have arisen by darwinian natural selection.
of course, this is also bullshit. irreducable complexity can be attained through darwinian evolution through the development of new cellular components and the loss of older/less-efficient components. but some people will cling to their outdated assertions no matter what.
It wouldn’t make sense to evolve your opinion while speaking against evolution.
The novelist Iain Banks wrote a letter to New Scientist pointing out how ironic it was that the whole ID thing was basically Creationism that had evolved camouflage. :-)
XD
.
Excellent point. RAmen, brother.
aa thank you mad kidd john, my mistake i thought i knew you
No problem, my fellow Pastafarian.
no problem douche bag
I have a couple of questions. First, if I convert to Pastafarianism, do I have to give up pasta? And also, if everyone in the world quit eating noodles for a whole week, will the FSM then reveal himself and return to lead us?
Oh look, another shit-for-brains impersonator.
My imposter is back. How complimentary.
I was hoping the followers of His Holy Dangling Appendage would be more open to those on the path of sincere search for the truth. I could also go for the discovery channel but I find them a bit too complacent to actually respect. It’s like too hard science for my medium sized appendage.
What I’m really getting at is that I don’t a religion that doesn’t require some kind of sacrifice is ever going to cut the cheese, so to speak.
see. do I have to spell it out for you?
AW DAM I wish my FUCKTARD kid sisterd hurry up and finish lettin the dog fuck her
its my turn
why does everybody forget that the FSM doesnt care if they believe in Him? submit all the “proof” you want that He doesn’t exist. He just laughs at it because He is drunk. He doesnt really WANT you to believe in Him, because He doesn’t want you to drink all His grog.
I thought I remembered reading this:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/10/1012_051012_chinese_noodles.html
4,000 year old noodles, knucklehead.
Does it count that I used Ask.com and didn’t Google it?
hey hey mister ur just jelous that our faith makes a heck of a lot more since then urs… man discovered pasta then but hey the FSM choose for us to chose it then (bloody ID/Aethiests)
I am posting this in various threads, because I wan’t all your opinions on this article:
I’m in the bible belt, but I have a harder time provoking fundies than you might think (I try my ass off though).
.
.
Heres a good example though: An opinion piece on evolution was published in my school newspaper today. The author was attempting to prove that you can believe in evolution and “creationism†at the same time (an opinion I generally agree with, well religion, but not creationism), yet the author didn’t seem to understand the premises of evolution or creationism.
.
She included such chestnuts as refering to “Darwins theory of the descent of man†(a book, but not in any way the actual theory), and “I think it is possible that God was simply practicing when he created the dinosaursâ€. On top of it all she claimed to be a scientist (in an intro Bio Class :) )
.
.
I have been flaming her idiocy on the newspapers website all day, yet no one in my university of 22,000 people thought that it was important enough to speak up!
Please read this article and post a comment:
http://www.theeastcarolinian.com/media/storage/paper915/news/2006/11/16/Opinion/Correction.Evolution-2462676.shtm
The link says “link not found” Nick
Try this:
http://www.theeastcarolinian.com/media/storage/paper915/news/2006/11/16/Opinion/Correction.Evolution-2462676-page2.shtml?norewrite200611162347&sourcedomain=www.theeastcarolinian.com
Actually, what you are describing is the concept known as ‘theistic evolution’ which quite effectively defines the process of evolution as being generated by a god. Many evolutionists who also happen to believe in Christianity have no problem with this concept. “Finding Darwin’s God” by Kenneth Miller, a devout Catholic, is worth a read.