A majority of the Pinellas County, Florida, School Board supports the inclusion of Intelligent Design in the science curriculum, reports the St. Petersburg Times.
Four members of the school board, including the chairperson and vice-chairperson, have made statements in support of Intelligent Design.
“The entire theory of evolution is not scientific fact. Intelligent design balances it out.” — Nancy Bostock, Chairperson
“I’d probably ideally like to keep it all [evolution and Intelligent Design] out of the classroom. If it’s going to create this much controversy, how important is it?” — Peggy O’Shea, Vice Chairperson
“I think that students should be given the opportunity to view all theories on how man evolved and let their science background and their religious background take over as to which one they believe in.” — Jane Gallucci, Member
“To teach one [evolution] as if nothing else existed, I think we’re doing our students a disservice.” — Carol Cook, Member
You can read the news article here.
The PCSB website states: “The public is encouraged to contact the School Board members on any issue.”
I suggest we contact the school board and let them know there are more than two theories of our origins. Pastafarianism is built on similar tenets as Intelligent Design, and has much greater support from the academic community. If you decide to write, please be respectful.
Contact Info:
Office: (727) 588-6300
E-mail: Board@pcsb.org
Individual E-mail addresses:
Nancy Bostock: bostockn@pcsb.org
Peggy O’Shea: osheap@pcsb.org
Jane Gallucci: galluccij@pcsb.org
Carol Cook: cookc@pcsb.org
And the hydra sprouts a new head. I’m particularly appalled by Ms O’Shea’s idea of teaching nothing controversial because it can’t possibly be important. Can we offer them a re-written curriculum that educates no-one in anything controversial - religion, politics, science, history, sociology, literature etc. What would they be left with?
emails away
I’d like to note that none of the above commentators are pirates who are for intelligent design in the classrooms.
“The entire theory of evolution is not scientific fact. Intelligent design balances it out.” Well yeah I mean unless it can be proven it’s considered scientific theory. But how does ID balance it out anyone? Can I get a Ramen?
Regardless, we throw in ID we must then offer the different views of ID which means more people will learn of the great FSM.
Pasta be with you.
Oh yeah and another thing, someone on the original article brought this up as a comment.
“”To teach one as if nothing else existed, I think we’re doing our students a disservice.”
I wonder if Ms. Cook would say the same about abstinence-only sex ed? that’s not showing the full picture either”
I totally agree alot of people that are pushing for ID in the classrooms are being hypocrital when it comes to other issues like sex ed and teaching kids all the methods of safe sex.
sorry I’m done done.
Pasta be with you.
Ramen.
Dear board,
I recently heard that you are going to teach the ID theory next to the theory of evolution in the classrooms.
To me, this is a very, very serious matter so that’s why I’m sending this.
May I point out the fact that there are more than 2 theories of our origin?
It is of course a great idea that students “should be given the opportunity to view all theories on how man evolved”. (quote Ms. Gallucci)
I like to point out that there is another theory; the theory that a Flying Spaghetti monster created the universe, earth and man.
A few things that you need to know and why this theory receives so much support from the scientific community:
1. He created the Universe first. The FSM needed a few days – we’re not exactly sure how many - to do this (being it such a huge thing and all). Then he created a mountain with trees and a Midgit. (a sort of midget, but not exactly).
I know, I hear you ask… “if this is Intelligent Design, then why are asteroids colliding, are there still traffic jams. Why does my husband need glasses and do I choke when inhaling while I drink my coffee??”
That, my dear board, is a very good and useful question and I will answer it:
2. This might sound a little strange, but when you believe it, it will make sense. He was a little drunk while he created it all. He even forgot that he did it, and made another world. He then sort of melted them together and that’s why there is a heaven with beer volcanoes. Really.
3. He controls everything with his Noodly Appendage – but not always. Being the world so large, he can’t be everywhere all the time, so sometimes you really need to keep your eyes on the road while driving. Trust me on that one.
4. All proof of evolution on this world is placed there by the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Although he didn’t leave a note, we’re pretty sure.
I don’t want this email get too long, but I’m sure you understand why I strongly feel that the children know who created them.
You can find more info on our website www.venganza.org
Sincirely,
Theo Westgeest
Thats just ridiculous.
.
“I’d probably ideally like to keep it all [evolution and Intelligent Design] out of the classroom. If it’s going to create this much controversy, how important is it?”
.
You often have to struggle before the truth can be found. Nothing in life is easy, nor is it handed to you. All this ‘controversy’ is necessary for growth.
“The entire theory of evolution is not scientific fact. Intelligent design balances it out.” — Nancy Bostock, Chairperson
.
How exactly is it balanced out? A highly probable explanation for how things came about that has been tested and viewed accurate…and something completely idiotic that was created by a group of people with no real testable evidence?(who were probably bored at the time, eatting their non-noodle based substances.)
“I’d probably ideally like to keep it all [evolution and Intelligent Design] out of the classroom. If it’s going to create this much controversy, how important is it?” — Peggy O’Shea, Vice Chairperson
.
I answered that already, and decided to come back and comment on everyone else :]
“I think that students should be given the opportunity to view all theories on how man evolved and let their science background and their religious background take over as to which one they believe in.” — Jane Gallucci, Member
.
Meanwhile you’re only actually giving them two theories, and not the complete spectrum.
“To teach one [evolution] as if nothing else existed, I think we’re doing our students a disservice.” — Carol Cook, Member
.
And to pollute the minds of young impressionable children with senseless dribble is a disservice. I’m of course speaking of ID.
The most interesting thing to note here is how incredibly stupid these people are. Perhaps we shouldn’t be wasting our time trying to change their obviously non-existent minds, and should instead take up a collection to pay for crayons, finger paints and other bright/shiny objects. This would keep them more usefully occupied and away from positions of responsibility where they can do great damage through their complete inability to understand the subject.
quote — “I’d probably ideally like to keep it all [evolution and Intelligent Design] out of the classroom. If it’s going to create this much controversy, how important is it?”
*blinks*
also calc is hard… is it realy that important also? can we leave that out so my kids don’t have to think. please no big words in the english books and more pictures.
Unfortunately, the debate is not only at the county level, as another part of the same article in St. Pete Times reports,
At least one member of the state Board of Education has objected to the proposed standards. Donna Callaway told a religious newspaper in Jacksonville that evolution “should not be taught to the exclusion of other theories of the origins of life.”
Additionally, Selena “Charlie” Carraway, program manager for the state Department of Education’s Office of Instructional Materials, has urged fellow Christians to fight the inclusion of evolution in the science curriculum.
As a science teacher, we appreciate the recognition that the CFSM has brought, and encourage your members to post at the education blog, “The Gradebook”. At least one board member is reading the blog, as she responded to a post. http://blogs.tampabay.com/schools/ is the link.
Thanks!
I’d really like to see a form letter that we can all use to send to these people. Something so I don’t sound like the pissed-off person that I am.
Sent an e-mail to them… lol
Hello, I just heard the good news that the Pinellas County, Florida, School Board supports the inclusion of Intelligent Design in the science curriculum. I think that a broader science curriculum is what the students of Pinellas County needs. Also, I hope that this step forward in science education is complimented with Pastafarianism, or FSMism, the Flying Spaghetti Monster. We believe the FSM is responsible for the source of all creation, DNA strongly resembling rotini pasta, (two inch lengths of thick screw-like pasta), single-celled string like primitive life, etc.
Pastafarianism is built on similar tenets as Intelligent Design, and has much greater support from the academic community.
Sincerely,
-Dillon L Karchner
“I’d probably ideally like to keep it all [evolution and Intelligent Design] out of the classroom. If it’s going to create this much controversy, how important is it?” — Peggy O’Shea, Vice Chairperson
.
.
o_o That’s a whole new level of stupid.
When will it all end!!!! How do these people get elected?!!!!
I guess I will warm up my keyboard for another e-mail onslaught!!
Ramen!!
“The entire theory of evolution is not scientific fact. Intelligent design balances it out.” — Nancy Bostock, Chairperson
-but it is a scientific theory with many facts to back it up. Intelligent design is a religious theory with no actual facts.
“I think that students should be given the opportunity to view all theories on how man evolved and let their science background and their religious background take over as to which one they believe in.” — Jane Gallucci, Member
-Well then this includes FSM of course, and every other religion in the world?
“I’d probably ideally like to keep it all [evolution and Intelligent Design] out of the classroom. If it’s going to create this much controversy, how important is it?” — Peggy O’Shea, Vice Chairperson
-Well it’s better than the others..
“To teach one [evolution] as if nothing else existed, I think we’re doing our students a disservice.” — Carol Cook, Member
-Right! So lets teach a theory with no evidence! WOO! Service the students with lies!
:) I sent them a lovely, polite e-mail to let them know about our theory.
Priceless quotes… And they wonder why only the deluded take them seriously…
“I’d probably ideally like to keep it all [evolution and Intelligent Design] out of the classroom. If it’s going to create this much controversy, how important is it?” — Peggy O’Shea, Vice Chairperson
That quote is gold. PURE GOLD.
“… all theories on how man evolved …”
There is only one theory on how man evolved.
It’s amazing that even after the whole ID thing has been shot down and made out as the psuedoscience BS creationism it is…..these people are still endorsing it. I mean I know none of these people watch NOVA but come on. Is Florida really that full of existentially handicapped people as is seems?
This is stupid. If we didnt have enough troble with polk, now this? The FSM is not pleased…..
I can not beleive that another school board thinks this a good idea. So, hopefully we can track down the individual E-Mails and inform them of our tasty theory. Untill then, we should email them at Board@pcsb.org and hope for some results.
i mean, this is really how it should be taught in one class
1.evolution(35min)
2.Flying Spaghetti Monster creation(20min)
3. I.D(5min)
any one disagree?
*sigh*. Once more unto the breach my friends, once more unto the breach…
I still cant believe this…….
Okay, I sent a letter off to these people.
It’s funny. They look like such intelligent people. They don’t “look” like they would supoort ID without also supporting FSMism.
Since looks can be decieving, I propose that we devise a test to determine if individuals are truly intelligent, and therefore capable of comprehending Intelligent Design, or for that matter, anything more complex than opening a beer. I’m thinking something along the lines of measuring brain cavity volume with a CT scan, and looking for any voids created by missing brain mass.
Oh wait, nevermind: I forgot that He will be there to “adjust” our test results. I guess we’ll have to gauge people’s intelligence by gut instinct since empirical data cannot be trusted.
rAmen.
I already emailed them and got a response back.
sigh..
this kind of blind stupidity annoys me
When will this end? It looks like every week another US school board decides to include one religion into science classrooms, while they ignore other theist theories. Leave them all out, or include them ALL!
Luckily activist school boards like this are utterly impossible in my country :)
Is it just me, or do these board members look like they just stepped out the nineteen-fifties?
Seriously.
I’m first!?
Here’s the letter I’m sending!
—As a child I was always interested in history. This interest history led me to pursue a career in education. I currently teach HS social studies.
Throughout learning and teaching about history, I’ve learned that it is next to impossible to separate history and religion. The two are intertwined.
Sometimes in history class, one discussion leads to another, and that topic leads to another and next thing you know, you are talking about something you intended to talk about.
The result of one of the conversations has prompted me to write to you.
I was talking about how Christianity has the 10 Commandments, how I am a big proponent for hanging them in schools, and how most other religions don’t have such rules. Then a student corrected me. “The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster has 8 ‘I Rather You Didn’ts’.”
I laughed this off. She then informed me that she has as much proof as I do; there is as much proof that a flying monster made of spaghetti created everything as there is as much proof that Jesus’ dad created everything.
“It all came out of a book. No one was around to see what was described in Genesis. For all we know, The Flying Spaghetti Monster created everything with his noodly appendages.”
I then asked her what she knew of these 8 “I Rather You Didn’ts.”
“I don’t remember all of them. But the ideas are;
-Just play nice with each other, don’t go killing or beheading people in my name.
-Don’t do anything that might hurt other people’s feelings
-Don’t spend millions making churches and what-not to worship me. Use that money more effectively; such as feeding the homeless, finding a cure for some disease. ”
She then added that, to the best of the Church of The Flying Spaghetti Monster’s knowledge, no one has ever been killed in the name of his Noodly Deity. “Can you say that about any other religion? Can we say, The Crusades and the Inquisition?”
These simple ideas appealed to me and I told the class I’d “Google” the Flying Spaghetti Monster when I get home.
I read up on this Noodly Deity. I must say that I am convinced that there is as much of a chance that the Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe as did Jesus’ dad.
If you insist in teaching Jewish-Christian belief of creation, I implore to you please consider teaching the idea of Carbo-Hyrdate-Creationism. I also encourage you to teach the main beliefs of the 8 I Rather You Didn’ts. These simple tenets encourage all men and women to do their best to get along, respect each other, and to try to help each other.
As we say,
Peace and RAmen
C. Felix
(A nice and simple contraction of Amen and Ramen [As in Ramen Noodles.])—
– Ah, I love instructing people in the ways of the FSM, i guess that’s two schools in the past couple weeks to mention their interest in ID. Quite concerning, eh? Well, in case anyone is interested, though doubtful, I’ll show ya what I wrote to them.–
Hello Pinellas County School Board,
I don’t want to take up much of your time, so I’ll make this as short as possible.
Just today I was looking in the news, and noticed an article concerning the schools interest in adding ID (intelligent design) into the science curriculum alongside evolution. I’m not against the addition of such content in the science curriculum, but I am rather distraught that there is only interest in the teaching of one form of ID. If the school does indeed end up teaching ID, then it would only be understandable and fair to incorporate other forms of ID, such as my belief, and the belief of many others, that the world, and it’s inhabitants, and even everything in existence, was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. And if the one form of ID that you school is so intent on teaching is the only one that is taught, and the Pastafarian ID (Flying Spaghetti Monsterism) is left untouched in the classroom, then legal action must take place. I know you will be reasonable and teach both though, so hopefully no one will have to worry about that.
Not only does the Pastafarian ID have just as much evidence as any other form of ID (maybe more), but we have many very respected scientists/doctors/etc that are completely for Pastafarian ID being taught at school. If need be, I could supply this list for you.
Anyways, this is turning out a bit longer than I expected, so I’ll go over the rest as quickly as possible. The teacher MUST wear complete pirate regalia while teaching the Pastafarian ID. For brevities sake, I won’t explain why, so best to not question it. My fellow Pastafarians and I can instruct the teachers in the ways of Pastafarian ID, so the teachers would be well versed in our teachings before hand. Lastly, I would like to make a toast to a time when ID, Flying Spaghetti Monsterism, and logical conjecture based on overwhelming observable evidence can all be taught side by side.
Have a good day, and may your curriculum be touched by His noodly appendage.
- ******* *******
“The entire theory of evolution is not scientific fact. Intelligent design balances it out.”
Balances it out? Balances it out? AAARRRGGGHHH!
“I’d probably ideally like to keep it all [evolution and Intelligent Design] out of the classroom. If it’s going to create this much controversy, how important is it?”
Oh, it’s very important. So much for politicians knowing what they’re talking about-yet another example.
“I think that students should be given the opportunity to view all theories on how man evolved and let their science background and their religious background take over as to which one they believe in.”
Then teach ID in religion class, and Evolution in science class.
“To teach one [evolution] as if nothing else existed, I think we’re doing our students a disservice.”
See above. There is more fact around evolution than ID, that ’s for sure.
More politicians jumping on the ID bandwagon. Sigh.
This kind of thing really gets me worried. It’s bad enough having to deal with people pushing religion outside of school, but once it gets like this…
Anyway, here are my replies as a loyal Pastafarian Discordian Unitarian Universalist Atheist:
.
Nancy Bostock:
I have yet to see ANY convincing evidence for Intelligent Design. Evolution, on the other hand, has a massive amount evidence supporting it, which you should NOT have to ask me for if you actually have a science/biology teacher in Pinellas County. So saying that we should “balance out” science with something that is not even slightly scientific seems a little like saying the best way to lose weight is through complete disembowelment.
.
Peggy O’Shea:
One of the biggest signs of importance is controversy. In the science classroom, students should learn science. It is that simple.
.
Jane Gallucci:
Out of curiosity, would it change your view if we gave you a list of all the different “theories” you should now be supporting? Just keep religion seperate from science, please.
.
Carol Cook:
Oh, I think most of them are aware that many other theories exist. If they want to learn them, there are plenty of sources to do so. But for now, can you just go back to teaching science in the science classroom? Intelligent Design is not science.
How have these school boards not learned?
Gold!
But seriously, there was Dover, Kansas, and a few recently, I mean seriously, this is the problem with education: stupid idiots are in charge.
“I think that students should be given the opportunity to view all theories on how man evolved and let their science background and their religious background take over as to which one they believe in.”
I like it I like it - as long as pastafarianism is given as much consideration as Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Judaism, Confucianism, Jainism, Zoroastrianism, Shinto, Taoism, Wicca and any other beliefs people hold to be true as well - if you want to teach intelligent design then you MUST teach all intelligent design theories.
“eye’d probubbly lyke to keep itt awl [speling and grammer] owt of the klasrum. if its going too kreat this much kontruvurse howe umportunt iss it.”
-ScienTastic
“The entire theory of evolution is not scientific fact. Intelligent design balances it out. Of course, I don’t know what the words ‘entire,’ ‘theory,’ ‘evolution,’ ’scientific,’ ‘fact,’ ‘intelligent,’ ‘design,’ or ‘balance’ mean, so take what I say with a grain of salt.” — Nancy Bostock, Chairperson
“To have someone like me on the school board, I think, does our students a disservice.”
— Carol Cook, Member
“I think that students should be given the opportunity to view all theories on how man evolved and let their science background and their religious background take over as to which one they believe in.” — Jane Gallucci, Member
Wait. What? Does she even KNOW what intelligent design IS?
I got a reply back from them, which has email addresses
Here is my Letter:
To the Pinellas County, Florida, School Board
.
It may not be immediately obvious why a person from Australia would take an interest in what is happening in a Florida School district. The short answer is that developments in Australian public education open the possibility that we will move to a similar system to yours.
.
I would like to take this opportunity to applaud you on your brave decision to oppose the scientific establishment and include alternate theories on the origins of life on earth in your Science curriculum.
.
In light of this bold move, I feel it is only right that I bring to your attention another such theory which has even MORE evidence to support it than does the theory of Intelligent Design.
.
I speak, of course, of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
.
As a practicing Pastafarian I am passionately committed to educating others about the Divine Pasta and the abundant evidence of His Creation of our world. Accordingly, I beseech you, as responsible public servants with the best interests of your student body at heart, to ALSO include the Theory of the Flying Spaghetti Monster in your Science curriculum.
.
Details of the Theory and the evidence supporting it have been included in an Open Letter to the Kansas School Board, which can be found at http://www.venganza.org/about/open-letter
.
I thank you for your balanced and concerned consideration and anticipate your inclusion of this Theory in you curriculum with great hope.
.
Have a Wonderful X-FSMass!
.
Drew Dight
Pastafarian.
What is it with Floridians now a days. we are causing so much ruckus. (Sex ed and Intelligent design)
I think they need to talk to the idiots in polk county, you’d figure they’d here about us somehow…
Seriously, Pinellas County is about 10 minutes away from me… I actually used to work there. You’ve got to be fucking kidding…. Good news is… I don’t have to travel very far to distribute propaganda!
I don’t see my post, so I’ll post what I sent to this Board of Educators:
“I am a Pastafarian who is greatly concerned for your support of Intelligent Design being brought into the science cirricula of Florida schools, without also including the teachings of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. FSMism is an alternate theory of Intelligent Design that has the backing of the scientific community, and is proven to be scientific by many graphable, provable data. I strongly urge you to review the open letter to the Kansas Board of Education, found here: http://www.venganza.org/about/open-letter. I’m sure you will agree with all us pastafarians that FSMism deserves equal time in the classroom when compared to Evolution and the Christian based Intelligent Design. I hope that our 10 million members will not have to have any bake-sales to fund legal action aginst PCSB for discriminating against our beliefs.
Thank you very much. Andrew D Pohlman. ”
I got the canned response saying my lette rwould be forwarded to the Superintendent and the Board. If I actually get real responses, I’ll post them.
OMFSM! I know this isn’t just particular to Florida, but some of the school boards in the state are just taking this issue and running with it.
.
And Ms. Peggy O’Shea’s comment: “If it’s going to create this much controversy, how important is it?” just demonstrates a fundamental flaw in American society. It seems if there’s some sort of debate and intelligent engagement involved, then it’s bad and should just be shoved under the rug. I’m sending them my email I sent to Polk County. This is just ridiculous.
Where are these people getting their “science?” They seem ready to accept the DNA evidence that will help loved ones cure a disease or find their relatives, but not the evidence that supports the Theory of Evolution. Science is not just applicable where one wants it to be - and it constantly changes. Every time it does, it makes the Theory of Evolution more plausible. And, of course, if these people want I.D. taught, then they also need to teach the origins of man/woman/pirates as told in the Gospel of the FSM.
The quotes from the 4 School Board members who support teaching “Intelligent Design” as science kind of say it all. No satire required when reality is just that stupid…
“The entire theory of evolution is not scientific fact. Intelligent design balances it out.” — Nancy Bostock, Chairperson
“I’d probably ideally like to keep it all [evolution and Intelligent Design] out of the classroom. If it’s going to create this much controversy, how important is it?” — Peggy O’Shea, Vice Chairperson
“I think that students should be given the opportunity to view all theories on how man evolved and let their science background and their religious background take over as to which one they believe in.” — Jane Gallucci, Member
“To teach one [evolution] as if nothing else existed, I think we’re doing our students a disservice.” — Carol Cook, Member
They’re as good as any satirical comment I can up with.
Hello,
I understand that a majority of your school board members support teaching Intelligent Design as part of a science curriculum.
In science, there are specific criteria for what qualifies as a “theory”. It’s not just an idea, or something that explains the data. The word “theory” means something very different in science than on TV, where detectives stand around a crime scene talking about their theories of the crime.
One of the criteria for a scientific theory is that it must be “falsifiable”. If you are not familiar with that idea, Wikipedia has a good explanation.
Evolution is falsifiable. Intelligent Design is not. So it does not belong in a science class.
That is not to say Intelligent Design is not what actually happened. Nobody can prove or disprove that, any more than they can prove or disprove the idea that the world was created 200 years ago, or even one second ago.
It’s just to say that Intelligent Design does not meet the criteria of science. If it is to be taught in schools, it should be taught somewhere else, perhaps as part of a philosophy course.
However, I can see where you might want to re-define science, throw out falsifiability as a criterion for scientific theories, and include things in the curriculum that have the support of powerful interest groups.
If that’s what you want to do, I strongly suggest you consider the theory of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. It’s not falsifiable, but neither is Intelligent Design, and they explain the data equally well. You may consider its proponents nut-jobs, but we are nut-jobs to be reckoned with, since many of us work in the computer industry, science, and engineering, and have plenty of money to contribute to lobbying and legal funds to promote our views.
Best regards,
Bob
And so the emails begin. Do not let the equally valid theory of Flying Spaghetti Monsterism be ignored any longer!
It’s always interesting to see which board members are the more rabid (and thus ironically more honest) and which try to cover their ideas with a veneer of diplomacy or hypocracy (e.e. teaching the controversy).
RAmen
(Gold, first time poster)
Oh, again? Well, well. These seem to be really very intelligent persons. I especially liked the argument of Ms. O’Shea. I think Physics create some controversies, too. Let’s do away with it. Or Mathematics, come to think of it…. well, why go to school in the first place?
I always thought, it was a mistake leaving the trees….
(OK, that’s Douglas Adams).
I sent the following email to Board@pcsb.org, and cc’d the superintendent (super@pcsb.org):
Hello,
I understand that a majority of your school board members support teaching Intelligent Design as part of a science curriculum.
In science, there are specific criteria for what qualifies as a “theory”. It’s not just an idea, or something that explains the data. The word “theory” means something very different in science than on TV, where detectives stand around a crime scene talking about their theories of the crime.
One of the criteria for a scientific theory is that it must be “falsifiable”. If you are not familiar with that idea, Wikipedia has a good explanation.
Evolution is falsifiable. Intelligent Design is not. So it does not belong in a science class.
That is not to say Intelligent Design is not what actually happened. Nobody can prove or disprove that, any more than they can prove or disprove the idea that the world was created 200 years ago, or even one second ago.
It’s just to say that Intelligent Design does not meet the criteria of science. If it is to be taught in schools, it should be taught somewhere else, perhaps as part of a philosophy course.
However, I can see where you might want to re-define science, throw out falsifiability as a criterion for scientific theories, and include things in the curriculum that have the support of powerful interest groups.
If that’s what you want to do, I strongly suggest you consider the theory of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. It’s not falsifiable, but neither is Intelligent Design, and they explain the data equally well. You may consider its proponents nut-jobs, but we are nut-jobs to be reckoned with, since many of us work in the computer industry, science, and engineering, and have plenty of money to contribute to lobbying and legal funds to promote our views.
Best regards,
Bob
O FSM, why are these people even on a school-board? They clearly lack the understanding to decide on anything concerning education!
“The entire theory of evolution is not scientific fact. Intelligent design balances it out.” — Nancy Bostock, Chairperson
.
‘I don’t know yet’=/=’God did it.’
.
“I’d probably ideally like to keep it all [evolution and Intelligent Design] out of the classroom. If it’s going to create this much controversy, how important is it?” — Peggy O’Shea, Vice Chairperson
.
Generally if something creates a lot of controversy, it’s because many people care about it. Usually when a great number of people care strongly about a subject, it’s because it is important.
.
“To teach one [evolution] as if nothing else existed, I think we’re doing our students a disservice.” — Carol Cook, Member
.
And ignoring the scientific method for a myth isn’t? What’s so wrong with a religion class? ID can be presented as fact there, not just a competing ‘theory’ although it can barely even be called a hypothesis. At least if it was called religion class, the children wouldn’t assume it had been well researched as they would in a science class.
Oh noes! They’re at it again!
“To teach one [evolution] as if nothing else existed, I think we’re doing our students a disservice.” — Carol Cook, Member
The Flying Spaghetti Monster created everything. It’s not perfect, because he was drunk.
All evidence for something else is put in place by him.
RAmen
I am so happy that I live in a country where the ID hoax is seen as just that.
I am all for religious believes, but the moment the belief is used for promoting oneself, to gain anything worldly, it no longer has anything to do with religion, at least not Christianity.
Religion and politics has nothing to do with science, in an ideal world, sadly both history and present events show that we don`t live in it yet.
“If it’s going to create this much controversy, how important is it?”
.
Importance is a key part of what makes something controversial. Nothing trivial ever creates controversy. (If anyone disagrees, and thinks that irrelevant and inane topics are rife with controversy, try to foment a furor in the nearest large city to your town over which flavor of ice cream is the best. Then chart how much success you have.)
.
-Avatar of Reason
This is my effot
.
I was horrified to see that the myth of Intelligent Design is being promoted in schools.
I’ll assume that those in support of it are part of the cowardly and undemocratic “wedge strategy” as there is no other explanation for insisting that a lie has any bearing in science!
.
Evolution is theory supported buy observable evidence. Creationism (which is all ID really is) has no scientific founding or supporting evidence. In fact the evidence refutes ID!
.
So I think those board members who are supporting ID should be ashamed of their selves! The use of such underhanded tactics to try to force religion into the science class is a despicable. Religion belongs in a church not in a school!
.
If you feel your religion is so threatened by science that you have to resort to unfounded lies and sudo-science then clearly your faith is some what lacking.
.
Stop trying to corrupt the minds of the young!
.
If you whish to teach these ideas then you will also have to teach all creation myths. Hindu, Mayan, Seek, Buddhist and especially FSM which actually has some science to back it up!
There are many more, but to cover them all in full would require a year or so out of a child’s education in a state that is already failing behind in standards.
Letter below just sent to them. I sent the brochure No. 2 as an attachment of anyoine wants to follow up with a different one.
.
To the members of the Pinellas County School Board,
Although living in England your teaching decisions do not directly involve me, I have become aware that you are supporting the teaching of Intelligent Design. Intelligent Design is no more science than any other creation theory, and in fact has less scientific evidence behind it than some theories. If Intelligent Design is to be taught as science, I would strongly recommend that you also teach the Flying Spaghetti Monster in science classes. I have attached a leaflet setting out the main tenets of Pastafarianism, and you can find out more at www.venganza.org, should you be so inclined. There is considerable scientific support for this theory.
.
There are a number of creation theories from different cultures around the world and, in order to give your students an detailed education in all of these, you would actually not have scope in the timetable to teach any other subject, such as mathematics or literature. I would suggest you select no more than half a dozen options to teach in addition to evolution, as your students would otherwise be somewhat overwhelmed. I would suggest you investigate teaching Christian Intelligent Design, as it will initially be the most familiar to any church-goers amongst the class. To balance this unscientific view, Pastafarianism is the most logical choice. Should your teachers be unfamiliar with the key principles you will be able to approach any Pastafarian for guidance in creating a teaching plan. As ancient Egyptian beliefs helped to define the Judeo-Christian tradition, I would suggest one of the Egyptian stories be taught as historic background. As I am sure you are aware, one of the earliest of these identifies the foundations of the Ennead in which Atum arose from the primordial waters (Neith), and masturbated to relieve his loneliness. His semen and breath became Tefnut (moisture) and Shu (dryness), respectively. From Shu and Tefnut, were born Geb (earth), and Nut (sky), who were born in a state of permanent copulation. Shu separated them, and their children were Ausare (Osiris; death), Set (desert), Aset (Isis; life), and Nebet Het (Nephthys; fertile land). I would advise balancing the old Egyptian theory with one of the tribal beliefs still adhered to. You could select any of these from around the world, but I particularly like that of the African Bushmen, as it forms a nice juxtaposition of 2 African theories. People and animals lived peacefully under the surface of the earth with the Great Master and Lord of All Life, Kaang, who made plans to bring them out onto the surface of the world. He created a tree on the surface and dug a hole down to the inner world, and then helped all of the people and animals to climb out and spread over the country. When night came, the people were afraid and lit a fire, the one thing they had been forbidden to do. This scared away the animals and they were never again able to communicate with them. In the interests of providing balanced views, I would recommend you also include one of the Asian cultures’ creation myth, for example Japanese. In that story, 2 gods created Japan together. They subsequently married and Izanami gave birth to three children, Amaterasu (the sun), Tsuki-yumi (the moon) and Sosano-wo. I would finally suggest that you teach at least one of the Native American traditions. I was able to find for you the Iroquois story of the pregnant Sky Woman being thrown down to earth by her husband and land forming on the back of a giant turtle, although I am not familiar enough with American prehistory to know if that is the most appropriate one for your students, geographically. You can read more on these and other stories at this website - http://www.cs.williams.edu/~lindsey/myths/myths.html
.
You may argue that not all of these stories should be taught in science; however, if Intelligent Design meets the criteria to be considered science then so do all of these. It may be easier to work them into the curriculum under religion, with evolution as the only science subject. I note with great concern Ms O’Shea’s suggestion that neither be taught, as it cannot be both controversial and important. Intelligent Design is controversial precisely because it promotes ignorance of one of the most important foundations in the field of biology. Even if some children are taught at home or in church not to listen, you must teach it to all children in order that those who are not already completely closed off to the idea are able to understand those principles. There is no reason why they cannot decide for themselves that it is not the only answer, but without it forming a part of their education they will be severely compromised in any future educational or career choices. Without being aware of the mechanisms of evolution, you will produce a generation in your community which is incapable of understanding science, or of following a career path in medicine or many technological fields. By restricting them in this way, you will have to import doctors and nurses, while scientific R&D industries will be forced to locate elsewhere in order to find a skilled workforce. This is not only bad for the children whose futures you are responsible for, but also for your whole community.
.
I would ask you to please give this further consideration. Listen to scientists explain what science involves and make your decision based on their expert advice, before you create an entire generation of students who are unable to contribute to the future advancement of society. Thank you very much for your time in reading this.
Regards,
.
[JennyAnyDots]
An Archaeologist from England
Bravo JennyAnyDots!
@ Bascule - well, it is my last day in work for a couple of weeks, and it seemed a fairly good use of my time!
Dear Board members,
I am delighted to notice that you plan to introduce Intelligent Design in science classes. As an European citizen, I would favor the following creation myth to be taught alongside Darwinian evolution:
“According to Norse lore, before there was Earth (Midgard), there was Muspell, a fiery land guarded by the fire sword-wielding Surt; Ginnungagap, a great void, and Niflheim, a frozen ice-covered land. When the cold of Niflheim touched the fires of Muspell, the giant Ymir and a behemothic cow, Audhumla, emerged from the thaw. Then, the cow licked the god Bor and his wife into being. The couple gave birth to Buri, who fathered three sons, Odin, Vili, and Ve. The sons rose up and killed Ymir and from his corpse created from his flesh, the Earth; the mountains from his bones, trees with his hair and rivers, and the seas and lakes with his blood. Within Ymires hollowed-out skull, the gods created the starry heavens.”
You surely will notice that, similar to the biblical genesis, in this story trees were created before there was light (”starry heavens”).
The Flying Spaghetti Monster creation myth, of course, would be a tasty alternative to this!
Here my little contribution. I decided to try the patriotic argument, perhaps it will help:
Honourable Pinella County School board members,
I am writing to you from France, as even there I heard of your plan to teach ID alongside evolution in science classes.
Considering myself as a friend of your great country and supposing you consider yourself as patriots, I wanted to warn you of the harm you are risking to do to the United States.
First, because you seriously damage the image of America. It is precisely this sort of things that make Europeans in general and Frenchmen in particular think Americans are completely retarded (please excuse the rudeness of the expression).
Because wanting to teach as if they had the same value a theory that is supported by the overwhelming majority of the scientific community (actually, the question is not if it occurred, but how exactly it did), by a huge and every day growing amount of evidence and has not only withstood testing for 150 years, but has reinforced itself all that time long, and another that hasn’t any convincing evidence at all, that isn’t even a theory by scientific standards, that hasn’t been peer-reviewed, that is incapable of withstanding any serious testing and that has been shown to be pseudo-science and just wrong (I am of course thinking of the Dover trial) simply appears to be the summit of stupidity, making every reasonable person of my continent laugh about the USA.
Perhaps you should know that in Europe, every scientist supports evolution, though many of them are Christians, and that if you really want to teach religious theories in science classes, there are many others which should be taught, too (at least for the constitution’s sake), for example the theory of “Unintelligent design”, stating a Flying Spaghetti Monster created the world.
The whole civilized world laughing about you isn’t only a pity, it disqualifies America as a leader.
And this not only politically and morally, but potentially, at least in a few years, economically. Because the leadership of the United States is based on the economy and the military. And both are so strong because your country is so good in scientific research. By doing what you do, you destroy American science.
And by destroying American science, you will destroy America.
Do you really want that?
Robert Surcouf
I suppose it won’t work, these people showing once again faith is the reason of the stupid
yay Jenny
Just as a quick update - their poor overloaded admin person has just sent a standard response notifying me that the letter is forwarded to board members, the superintendant and his staff. She was probably expecting a nice quiet couple of days before the break, only to be deluged with stuff from us. I’ll post any reply I might receive in a couple of weeks. I just hope the admin assistant has a good sense of humour!
I sent this today. I release any rights to it - you may change it, take parts of it for your own, or utilize it in its entirety if you so wish.
To whom it may concern,
.
I have been apprised to the fact that four members of the Pinellas County School Board support the inclusion of Intelligent Design to the science curriculum.
.
In life, we are in the habit of deferring to experts. You likely do not understand the science behind medical procedures that have prolonged the lives of people close to you, but you do not have to understand them – all that matters is that somebody, an expert, does understand them. Even scientists use equations in their work for which they could not educe any deep understanding – they have deferred to the experts, in this case, the mathematicians.
.
Having read the quotes of the board members, they are abdicating themselves from the scientific authorities for a collection reasons that are deeply inadequate. These reasons boil down to the idea that we have an obligation to teach our children the religious community’s alternative to science as though a failure to do so would mean we were embracing obscurantism. This sentiment was echoed by Carol Cook, Jane Gallucci, and Chairperson Nancy Bostock.
.
This idea is patently absurd. Science is not a democracy. Science is a brutal field where concepts are tested, scrutinized, and rejected if they are found to be without evidential merit. This is the scientific process, and it exists as a check against bad science. If a hypothesis is subjected to the process of peer-review and subsequently rejected, the normal response is to incorporate the accompanying criticism, rework the hypothesis, and resubmit. This cycle of double-checks and self-correction is what separates science from other fields as the preeminent sphere of knowing. This is why science has given us quite literally everything that is reasonable to believe about how reality functions.
.
It is to this requisite system of correction that Intelligent Design has been particularly aversive. They have submitted their hypothesis and had it summarily rejected for a litany of reasons. However, the supporters of Intelligent Design have been reticent to incorporate any standards or consider any of the critiques which would allow it to ascend to the domain of science. Instead, they are attempting to circumvent the scientific process by proliferating their ideas to a public that is religiously eager to embrace the idea. It is from this villainous tactic that we receive the notion that science, or any other evidence-based discipline, is a democracy or is subject to how many people it offends. No matter how put off I may be by the fact that the Earth orbits the Sun, in science the evidence trumps my feelings. The truth has never made any guarantees that it will conform to our intrinsic sense of wishful thinking in the way that religion has, which is precisely why the dispassionate adherence to the evidence on display in the field of science is so crucial.
.
This thinly veiled creationist trick of insinuating that science has anything to do with who it offends has taken root in a four-member concentration of the Pinellas County School Board, and the concern I feel over this fact should be amplified one hundred fold for anybody living in that area – especially for somebody who has a portion of the responsibility for ensuring the quality of the education the local children receive.
.
In Dover, it cost their district over two million dollars to lose and look like buffoons. If you are determined to follow the lemmings on the Board of Education towards whichever cliff they are marching, then it will also cost you over two million dollars to lose and look like buffoons. Do not do this. Our future resides in the hands of our children and we cannot afford to turn a blind eye to the miasma of willful ignorance.
.
Defer to the experts on what is science.
.
JT Eberhard
President, Missouri State University Chapter of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster
“It has come to my attention that you have made the decision to include Intelligent Design in the standard science curriculum in Pinellas County . I agree that all available theories should be taught, and the children should use their own judgment to decide upon which theory is correct.
.
However, you make a dire mistake in excluding the theory with academic support second only to evolution: Unintelligent Design. You see, look at all of creation we notice things such as war, disease, violence, crime, etc. These are all signs of a very flawed, and unintelligent, creation process. Of course, the creator himself must have been omniscient and quite intelligent in order to create the beautiful things in life (such as sunsets, rainbows, humans, Rice Krispies, etc.), which shows that such a being must have been heavily inebriated at the time.
.
This theory is known as Unintelligent Design, FSMism, or the Theory of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. It is called such because we have evidence that the creator manifests itself as a being composed of many tentacle-like appendages resembling noodles.
.
You can find the aforementioned academic endorsements here”
.
Short but sweet, and got a message saying it’s being forwarded.
“I’d probably ideally like to keep it all [evolution and Intelligent Design] out of the classroom. If it’s going to create this much controversy, how important is it?” — Peggy O’Shea, Vice Chairperson
Yes, controversy in the class room is an altogether bad idea. We should probably stop teaching our students anything and instead have them watch a multi-colored flashing orb all day while sitting in a well padded room. This method works very well in preventing teen pregnancy and teen drug and alcohol abuse. We know that if our students don’t know about it they won’t do it.
Interesting correlation between big hair, pastel colors, neck scarves, and general ignorance.
Let them teach ID. Its fine with me.
.
I picture it happening this way:
There are two main beliefs as to how everything came to be.
1) A God or Gods snapped his/her/their fingers, did a dance or something and everything came into being.
.
2) Things change slowly over time…now lets examine the evidence of this…etc…
.
.
Seriously? I would love to see the content, the scope and sequence, the curriculum of ID. How much can be in there?
.
If any out there can find, or does have an ID curriulum for a public school, let me know.
Madame Chairman and Members of the Board:
.
Where the premise of education is to teach *how* to think, rather than *what* to think, it is appropriate to present competing ideas with comparable credentials. Unfortunately, not every competing idea is equally valid; peer review helps weed out those which are not viable — or not relevant to a given discipline — from those which are relevant and lead to a better-informed population.
.
However, neither public nor private schools are designed to allow students to “make up their own minds” about everything, nor to protect them from exposure to broader knowledge. If that were the case, there would be no need for schools in the first place. For those whose religious beliefs require that students be presented with options to choose whether to learn science in their science classes, please consider this reasoning as applied to other courses:
.
1. Language Arts
All classroom instruction will be bi-lingual. Students will spend equal time learning both English and Spanish as there is debate regarding which is the oldest language. Students will make up their own minds as to which they believe is most correct for completing their assignments (and appropriate within their neighborhoods), without coercion of majority rule, or penalty due to instructor prejudice.
.
2. Other Science Units
Science teachers will ‘teach the controversy’ between Alchemy and Chemistry, giving equal time to both. Chemistry is the modern, secular offshoot of Alchemy, which enjoyed a long and respected tenure in Western history. Many notable, devout men (and women) believed in Alchemy, without diminishing their faith or their other academic achievements. In order to Leave No Florida Child Behind, warning stickers will be affixed to handouts of the Periodic Table of Elements stating that, as its data is subject to change, it is of dubious value. Students will be required to transmute base metals into gold for the final exam, and provided with authorized 17th century English translations of Bronze Age texts as reference materials.
.
3. Music
Band and Chorus students will no longer be constrained to so-called ‘music theory’. Since Western classical music is difficult or offensive for some listeners, each student will follow an independent study which best conforms to his or her existing experience and taste. Familiar composers such as Toby Keith and Trick Daddy will be given equal consideration with French elitists such as Claude Debussy or Joseph-Maurice Ravel. Of course, as the arts can be ‘controversial’, perhaps the safest course is to eliminate them from your curriculum entirely.
.
4. Mathematics
Math students will no longer be limited to ‘theories’ they may find offensive, such as ‘Algebra’ (invented by Pagans and Muslims), ‘Game Theory’ (school is not for playing games) ‘Homology Theory’ (this sounds suspicious), or ‘Proof Theory’ (can they prove it or is it just a theory?). Besides, who cares what ‘x’ stands for? They’re never going to need that. Also, the Bible states that Pi = 3.
.
5. Human Development
A) “The entire theory of Abstinence is not scientific fact. Education on fertility and contraception balances it out.”
B) “I think that students should be given the opportunity to view all theories on how pregnancy may be avoided and let their science background and their religious background take over as to which one they believe in.”
C) “To teach one [abstinence] as if nothing else existed, I think we’re doing our students a disservice.”
.
6. Civics
Finally, as freedom of religion *is* protected in the United States, all students may cite the scriptures and traditions of their personal belief systems in any and all classes where the curriculum is in discrepancy or causes personal anxiety, without challenge and without grade penalty for not embracing the teacher’s theories.
.
- - - - - - - - - -
.
Members of the Board, I refer you to an article in the December 5, 2007 edition of the Washington Post: “The average science score of U.S. 15-year-olds lagged that of students in 16 of 30 countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a Paris-based group that represents the world’s richest countries. U.S. students were further behind in math, trailing counterparts in 23 countries.”
.
I understand that your constituency is dominated by different Christian sects, none of which is in complete agreement within its own members — let alone within the larger body — regarding any question. Please honor both your God and your country by allowing parents to take responsibility for their children’s religious education within their respective homes and churches. You, as stewards of the *public* school system, are accountable for providing the serious education they will need to compete in a world dependent on technologies requiring the ability to reason. You are not authorized to choose their religious beliefs and enforce your own.
.
Sincerely,
[pieces o’nine]
I was so excited — I got a response back!!!… but it was just to say my email would be forwarded to the board members and the superintendant. Darnit.
I too got the response saying my email was forwarded to the board and superintendent. I’ll be very surprised if I get a response out of them, but I do appreciate the response (canned though it may be) from this innocent bystander. Like others, if I do get anything in response, I’ll let you know.
Hey Mods:
.
I posted those email addresses yesterday, but it seems you’ve moderated them out. Don’t you want them?
.
St John the Blasphemist
Saint of Fruits of Labour
I just sent them the following e-mail.
———-
I demand that all forms of ID (and/or UD, see below for a bit more on this) be included, along with
rational conjecture based on billions and billions of hours of observation and thought followed by
billions and billions of hours of critical study of the first billions and billions of hours in order to
come to reasonable conclusions that seem to agree with the world we see around us, in any school
cirriculum so that our young may have a fully grounded grasp on things.
It is my belief, shared by many others, that the Earth was created 5,001 years ago by the, “Flying
Spaghetti Monster.” At this point the difference between traditional ID’s position and our Church’s
may not be clear and you may wonder how the Pastafarian’s (thus we call ourselves) position differs.
The difference is in this, we Pastafarians have no quibble with science. Science is not wrong in their
findings, as far as can be shown or proven. It is a victim of the world as it actually is. The “Lord of
Lasagne” sees a scientest (or anyone else) making a measurement, and with his great “Noodly
Appendege” alters the measurement to make it seem that the observer’s data agrees with a Universe
that is 14 billionish years old. Why he does this we aren’t sure. And as the “Price of Pasta” doesn’t
generally converse with us (Evidently we just aren’t all that interesting to the “Maker of Manicotti”)
it may never be entirely clear.
Also, our Church has graphs!!!!!! Evolutionists and other scientists are all the time dragging in
graphs and stuff to support scientific views, well move over Newton, we gottem too. Not knowing
how to stick the graph in here you’ll have to take my word for it (unless you visit our site) that it
shows an almost perfect inverse relationship between the decrease in Pirates and the rise in global
tempature.
For whatever reason the “Giver of Gnocchi” is uncommonly fond of Pirates and is angry
over their decrease.
In addition to graphs the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti contains a number of mathmatical proofs
that are made up of hard to understand symbols used in a manner not commonly seen in regular
cyphering. It doesn’t stop there either. We got proofs using all kinds of scientifical looking stuff. No
matter what your views may be, we think you will agree that this is something that is sorely missed
in the older religions.
A few words on, UD or, “Unintelligent Design.” There is in the “Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti
Monster,” (available at Amazon.com should you be interested) on page 30-31 a brief passage that
lays the groundwork for the concept of, “Unintelligent Design.” I feel that the title of this line of
thought says enough that a full explanation is not necessary at this point.
I will, however, add an emperical observation that may help. Early last month I was called to the VA
and was subjected to all the usual indignaties that a man of 60 must endure. During this pleasant
interlude I was informed that I was now the proud possesor of hemorrhoids. And just to top it off,
next Monday, I have to go in and have a camera poked up my pooper.
You know. . . you’re the master of everything, you got all the power there is, you got your blank
canvas to work with, it looks to me like some thought and planning would have gone a long ways
toward toward not having these little problems. I’m sure you can come up a few examples where
some basic groundwork before actually starting creation would have been real handy.
For those of you that are ignorant, as was until recently, of the “King of Calamaretti” you might
want to stop by his site at http://www.venganza.org/ and check it all out.
There are several good reasons to join (if you will allow me to evangelize for just a moment):
1. Flimsy moral standards.
2. Every Friday is a religious holiday.
3. Our Heaven is way better. We got a beer volcano and a stripper factory.
4. Even our Hell isn’t all that bad. The beer volcano dispenses only stale, and probably warm (the
scriptures aren’t clear on this point) beer and the strippers are older and like those in Las Vegas tend
to have various veneral diseases.
5. We don’t have 10 commandments but rather 8 “I Really Wish You Wouldn’ts.” We’re pretty short
on dogma too.
6. Try our 30 day guarantee. After 30 days you don’t like us, your old God will probably take you
back.
So, it is the desire of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster that our, equally valid, revealed
theory of how we came to be on the earth should be included in any debate over whether or not there
will be changes to any public school’s science curriculum.
If, and when, this should come to a debate rest assured that we will be right there with you fighting shoulder to shoulder to have all equally valid theories presented to the students of this country.
To the esteemed members of the Pinellas County School Board:
Ah, what a breath of fresh air you bring to the curricular debate. I must wholeheartedly congratulate you on your courageous decision to throw caution to the wind. For as you know, American jurisprudence is based upon the theory of stare decisis et non quieta movere, whereupon your decision to allow other theories to be taught alongside evolution sets the precedent, opening wide the floodgates of the mind–ushering in an era when all theorists and theologians alike may sue for inclusion in your schools’ teachings. While more timid school boards would shy away from the budgetary burden of legal hearings and lawsuits, you are boldly saying, “I will not be cowed by my fiduciary responsibility to my constituents!” If critical programs must be eliminated merely to afford the expenses associated with this unpopular choice, if our children must pay this price so that future generations will be blessed with the freedom of deciding that truth is whatever we think it should be, then so be it.
I, for one, thank you for lifting the bonds of conformity, and know that He looks favorably upon your actions to let His word reach the minds and hearts of our children. By administratively removing the burdens of proof normally afforded the determination of valid scientific theory, we are no longer shackled by the rigors of empirical thought, which–let’s be honest–are really tough.
For years I have been rebuffed for my theories that conventional history, too, is nothing more than a hyperspectral multidimensional projection onto the collective consciousness of humanity starting at the beginning, with creation, and continuing until October 24, 1979. (Not coincidentally, this is the date of first use of the trademark for Prego® brand pasta sauce.) Such a mental manifestation, of course, serves as the ultimate test of faith, being an artifice of His omnipotence. It is also serves as a clever means to distract His followers from the questionable reasons for our creation, namely the drinking.
So by your actions, you will finally give voice to my desire to have this serious alternative theory taught alongside so called “accepted” history, and reveal the Truth of His Noodly meddlings in not just natural history (a.k.a. science), but history itself.
Lest I misrepresent my views as those of a single united voice, it must be stated that followers of the Flying Spaghetti Monster have interpreted their perceptions in myriad ways, and in acknowledgment of the fairness doctrine, their diverse views, as well as those of Zoroastrians, Yam Worshipers, Buddhists, Shinto, and even practitioners of non-conventional religions, be afforded equal time in explaining science, history, mathematics, and the vocational arts, insofar as their faith speaks to the basis of these fields of study.
A rousing huzzah to this brave, new, discordant academe that, by your convictions, shall be foist upon our credulous youth. I look forward to your consistent, unwavering support as we embark upon the lengthy and arduous task of rewriting the entirety of Pinellas County’s syllabus.
Praise be to the Flying Spaghetti Monster!
Has anyone noticed they have retro hair cuts? It’s like looking back in time to the early 80’s
Wait…let me get this straight-if it causes controversy, it isn’t important. So that means the Iraq war, the debate over religion, and pretty much all politics isn’t importnat? Great to have those things off my chest…
“I think that students should be given the opportunity to view all theories on how man evolved and let their science background and their religious background take over as to which one they believe in.” — Jane Gallucci, Member
Okay then, teach the science version in the science class and the religious version in religion class. Of course, as we all know, his Noodly Appendage will touch all and prevail. Which sounds a bit disturbing for a classroom, admittedly. Golly gosh! It’s so complex.
RAmen
I got the same canned response as everyone else. But it’s better than nothing, right?
Since everyone else is posting emails here is the one I sent. Feel free to use any piece of it or the whole thing in its entirety.
Dear Pinellas County School Board,
I recently read a report in the St. Petersburg Times which suggested that the majority of you held the same point of view regarding the teaching of the scientific theory of evolution and natural selection, and inclusion of the religious idea of Intelligent Design (ID).
I, first and foremost, would like to start by reminding you of the (fairly) recent decision in the Kitsmiller vs Dover suit in Pennsylvania. As I am sure you are aware, the court found that the concept of ID failed all three criteria of the lemon test for violation of the Establishment Clause of the Bill of Rights, and as such is not permitted to be taught (at least in the context of a science class). If you are unaware of the particulars of the case, or even if you are, may I suggest a number of videos regarding the trial and the scientific validity of ID, including the recently aired NOVA program (available at http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/program.html) and a number of presentations including those by Kenneth Miller (Brown University), and Eugenie Scott (National Center for Science Education) both of which are available on www.youtube.com and google videos. Even though the case only holds precedent in that particular federal district I hope you see that when challenged in a court, even in a religious district, with a Bush appointed federal judge, this concept of ID is exposed as having no scientific validity.
I would also like to point out that, based upon the quotes each of you (ID supporters) have given to the St. Petersburg Times, you don’t seem to quite grasp the, possibly subtle, difference between the popular usage of the word theory and the scientific use of the word. The popular usage of the word usually points to any unsubstantiated idea that one comes up with, however, in the scientific community an hypothesis only gets the label of theory after rigorous testing and, usually, refinement.
I would now like to point out to each of you, the holes in logic/reason/judgment you have displayed in your statements to the St. Petersburg Times.
“The entire theory of evolution is not scientific fact. Intelligent design balances it out.” — Nancy Bostock, Chairperson
Ms. Bostock, based upon this logic, gravity is not scientific fact and must be balanced out by the idea that god is pushing everything down toward the earth, actively holding all of the planets so they don’t’ float away, moving all of the stars around in the galaxy, pushing galaxies together to merge…wow god sure has a lot of hands doesn’t he? Also based upon this logic chemistry is not scientific fact and therefore must be balanced out with the fundamentals of alchemy…I’m really looking forward to turning some lead into gold. Furthermore, astronomy must be balanced out by astrology…It’s not my fault; the stars made me do it.
“I’d probably ideally like to keep it all [evolution and Intelligent Design] out of the classroom. If it’s going to create this much controversy, how important is it?” — Peggy O’Shea, Vice Chairperson
Ms. O’Shea, the concept of Evolution and Natural Selection has been called the single most unifying principle of biology. Everything we know about biology only makes sense in light of evolution. Clearly it can’t be that important. Trying to keep evolution out of the classroom only hurts the students by making them ignorant. Clearly you don’t want your students to be competitive in the work place.
“I think that students should be given the opportunity to view all theories on how man evolved and let their science background and their religious background take over as to which one they believe in.” — Jane Gallucci, Member
Ms. Gallucci, while at first glance what you suggest here sounds reasonable; there are a few problems with it. The first problem is, as stated above, only one of the ideas you want to put forward to your students is a theoryin the scientific form of the word, and therefore only the scientific theory belongs in a science classroom. The second problem here is that you yourself in this quote identify ID as a religious idea; this highlights your motivation for teaching ID as religious in nature and thus violates the test applied by the courts to determine whether an act violates the Establishment Clause (you should take note of this because right here you just lost the court case that will follow if you choose to adopt an ID teaching policy). The next problem here is that you are forcing a false dichotomy. In case you don’t understand what I mean or where I’m coming from I’ll expand on this point. I assume from your statement that you feel that acceptance of evolution and being a religious person are not compatible, and thus accepting evolution means you deny god. This is the way it seems you want to present it to your students, “Either you believe science or you believe in GOD.” This dichotomy does not exist. There are many, many people who do not see evolution and religion as incompatible, including the aforementioned Dr. Miller, and the previous Popes: Pius XII (who held in his encyclical Humani Generis that there was no opposition between evolution and the doctrine of the faith about man and his vocation), and John Paul II who said the following in an address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences [Oct 22, 1996] :
“Taking into account the state of scientific research at the time as well as of the requirements of theology, the encyclical Humani Generis considered the doctrine of “evolutionism” a serious hypothesis, worthy of investigation and in-depth study equal to that of the opposing hypothesis. Pius XII added two methodological conditions: that this opinion should not be adopted as though it were a certain, proven doctrine and as though one could totally prescind from revelation with regard to the questions it raises. He also spelled out the condition on which this opinion would be compatible with the Christian faith, a point to which I will return. Today, almost half a century after the publication of the encyclical, new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis. [Aujourdhui, près dun demi-siècle après la parution de l’encyclique, de nouvelles connaissances conduisent à reconnaitre dans la théorie de l’évolution plus qu’une hypothèse.] It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge. The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favor of this theory…With man, then, we find ourselves in the presence of an ontological difference, an ontological leap, one could say. However, does not the posing of such ontological discontinuity run counter to that physical continuity which seems to be the main thread of research into evolution in the field of physics and chemistry? Consideration of the method used in the various branches of knowledge makes it possible to reconcile two points of view which would seem irreconcilable. The sciences of observation describe and measure the multiple manifestations of life with increasing precision and correlate them with the time line. The moment of transition into the spiritual cannot be the object of this kind of observation, which nevertheless can discover at the experimental level a series of very valuable signs indicating what is specific to the human being. But the experience of metaphysical knowledge, of self-awareness and self-reflection, of moral conscience, freedom, or again, of aesthetic and religious experience, falls within the competence of philosophical analysis and reflection while theology brings out its ultimate meaning according to the Creator’s plans.”
Furthermore, if you’re willing to bring religion into the science class then why are you only contrasting Evolution with ID? There are a plethora of other creation stories that hold just as much weight as ID does. If, as you claim, your students “should be given the opportunity to view all theories” then you must have no problem with them being told about: Izanagi and Izanami cast a jewel crested spear into the ocean from on top of Ama-no-ukihashi to create the land (Shinto), Brahma created the Earth from the lotus flower and then formed the plants and animals (one of several Hindu stories), or even how 400 years ago the Flying Spaghetti Monster created mankind by mistake while in a drunken stupor and then created a slew of evidence to make us think that evolution was true, just to test our faith (don’t forget to include the part about how the decline in the number of pirates is why global warming happens, no really they have a scientific graph and everything). Wow there are so many different stories that you will need to include in order for the students to hear “all theories” that you’re going to need a separate science class called “the origin of life”, so that the teachers in the other classes actually have some time to teach the rest of Biology.
“To teach one [evolution] as if nothing else existed, I think we’re doing our students a disservice.” — Carol Cook, Member
Ms. Cook, since every counterpoint I would make to this statement has already been included in this letter I’ll refrain from restating them.
In the end I’m not trying to convince you that evolution is right and ID is wrong because I feel that this would be tantamount to me bashing my head against wall. What I am trying to convince you of is that only one theory regarding the origins of life belongs in the science classroom, the one that is based upon science. Religious views regarding the origin of mankind belong in church. If you attempt to make policy that ID is to be taught alongside evolution, the results will be you losing in court and wasting a load of the school district’s money defending a policy that you should know ahead of time will not hold. Likely another thing will also happen, as we saw in Dover, all of you voting for imposing religious views on science students will be ousted from your positions in the next election and replaced by people who are either more reasonable or better educated, or both. Of course these predictions stem merely from my own personal hypotheses and are, thus, in need of testing, I would love for you to help me make them scientific theory.
Thank you for taking the time to read this (and I hope you did read it in its entirety),
Drew Walton
Sent my support to the school board:
Dear Pinellas County School Board members
.
I would like to offer to you my support for your stand in favour of intelligent design. It is wonderful that some people still have such admirable conviction that they stand behind their beliefs when faced with 200 years of scientific findings.
.
I would like to offer one more to the list of possible theories on the birth of the earth and development of life. You have surely received great support from pastafarians advertising the Flying Spaghetti Monster version of this issue and I also hear that someone brought forth the Norse version. The following is the old Finnish version of things from The Kalevala: The daughter of the Ether lifted her knee from the water when she saw the pochard bird (a bird that resembles a duck) looking for a place to build her nest. The bird built her nest on the knee and lay 7 eggs, 6 golden and 1 iron, and began to hatch the eggs. This heated up the knee of the hapless water-mother (aka. the daughter of the Ether) so that she thought her knee was burning. She moved and all the eggs fell into the water shattering in pieces. The pieces then formed the earth, heaven, stars, moonbeabs, sunshine and clouds. Then the water-mother, who was pregnant, gave birth to the first man Wainamoinen.
.
You can find the full story in the beautifully written epic Kalevala. An English translation is available at http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/kveng/kvrune01.htm
.
This story also corrects some of the gender bias that is present in many other version of this issue, since the dauther of the Ether known as Ilmatar is clearly a woman.
.
I wish you all a wonderful celebration of the birth (or rebirth) of the sun or sun god - aka. Christmas. I am confident that people so learned in and pro ancient beliefs are informed that the upcoming festival is one of the oldest festivities of humankind and has been celebrated for many millenia around the time of the winter solstice, and only converted into the current birth-of-christ festival around 300 AD.
.
Yours truly
JT, your response was the bees knees man…
I noticed that many many people have spent considerable time responding to these . . . are they really former teachers?
I for one will take the time reading all of your responses.
I wrote:
As a student and teacher, a father and United States Citizen, I think classroom curriculum is the most important issue we face concerning education in our society. I also feel the education of our youth is our nations most important issue, even surpassing insurance issues and social security.
The question isn’t about teaching Intelligent Design. The question is which class should it be discussed in? It is not Science. Saying that our universe is too complex to have been accidental is an argument, albeit a weak one.
Teach I D in a theology class, a mythology class, a sociology class, and even a politics class, but leave the science classes to recordable pieces of information that are measurable.
Finding a bird in Africa and a bird on Madigascar that are almost exactly alike except for a stripe on the wing, points to evolution. These animals are distant relatives but have evolved seperately. THAT is scientific evidence. Fossils are scientific evidence. Fruit fly breeding and records of mutations are scientific evidence. I D theory has none of this.
“The entire theory of evolution is not scientific fact. Intelligent design balances it out.” — Nancy Bostock, Chairperson
Nancy, please read the last paragraph again.
“I’d probably ideally like to keep it all [evolution and Intelligent Design] out of the classroom. If it’s going to create this much controversy, how important is it?” — Peggy O’Shea, Vice Chairperson
Peggy, how would you have handled the ‘controversy’ of segregation?
“I think that students should be given the opportunity to view all theories on how man evolved and let their science background and their religious background take over as to which one they believe in.” — Jane Gallucci, Member
Jane, I think that children should be taught about all religioins and allowed to choose (or not choose ) for themselves which one they think fits best in their lives, but only when they are adults.
“To teach one [evolution] as if nothing else existed, I think we’re doing our students a disservice.” — Carol Cook, Member
Carol, my previous comment also applies here.
J to the C
WONDERFUL! Soon FSMism will be taught too! We will have our day and this science and Intel Design business will both be driven out.
Dear Pinellas County School Board,
Although I do not live in Florida I would like to congratulate you on the recent decision to include Intelligent Design in the science curriculum. Although I am not a Christian, I am glad to finally see that equally viable explanations to our existence are finally going to be taught to our children. I hope that since you have now broken down the wall to learning more teachings will be made available to students. I think it would be appropriate that at minimum the theory of Intelligent Design by the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) be included in the curricula. If you look at the evidence that leads Pastafarians to believe that the universe was created by an invisible Flying Spaghetti Monster, I think you will find it at least as compelling in its documentation as that of the Evolution and the Christian theory of Intelligent Design.
As Jane Gallucci said,
“I think that students should be given the opportunity to view all theories on how man evolved and let their science background and their religious background take over as to which one they believe in.”
Please let me know at your soonest convenience when you will consider introducing additional theories to the curricula, I would be happy to send you hard evidence that buttresses the FSM Intelligent Design theory, or travel to give an in-person presentation about it.
Kind Regards,
my name
Whilst surfing the Wikipedia entries about ID, I noticed that people in Pinellas County have a history of trying to promote ID.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Of_Pandas_and_People
“In March 1990, the school board in Pinellas County, Florida rejected an appeal by a retired minister “to adopt the textbook Of Pandas and People that would offer a creationist’s view”. [23]”
in the “Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District” case the book “Of Pandas and People” was the book recommended to the students to get the creationist view. It’s published by the texas group Foundation for Truth and Ethics (provided it’s their truth I guess) Perhaps some locals have been trying to change the board for one more amenable to their views since.
Yun Long
Are these guys doing this on their own bat or have they been encouraged?
Further reading since my last post. It was suggested in Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More_Law_Center#Notable_Cases_Involving_the_Thomas_More_Law_Center” that “theThomas More Law Center travelled the country shopping for a school board willing to withstand a lawsuit as a test case for the teaching of intelligent design in public schools”. Given that someone in Pinellas County previously tried to get ID in the curriculum perhaps the TMC is looking for another go at a constitutional challenge. It cost Dover $1 mill in legal costs which was only half the full bill, hopefully Pinellas County won’t be stuck with a similiar bill.
Still flying
Yun Long
@JC,
.
Thank you very much. I’ve had a bit of practice.
Yours was also spot on.
.
JT
@Surcouf
I was moved by this:
“The whole civilized world laughing about you isn’t only a pity, it disqualifies America as a leader.”
I may be a United States Citizen, but I totally agree with you. You’re right, our future doesn’t look bright.
My letter to the fine folks at pinella county……….happy chriFSMas !!
.
Esteemed members of the board.
.
It has come to my attention that you are seeking to teach i.d.(intelligent design)
in the classroom, BRAVO i say to you.
.
We(Canadians)are overjoyed that someone has at long last realized the importance of teaching our children of the omnipotent & omnipresent force that must surely be responsible for creating all we know & see. That you wish to teach this in a science class, where conjecture, speculation & baseless theories are quickly laid to rest, shows great conviction & clarity of thought.
.
Im sure I speak on behalf of Pastafarians around the world when I offer you heartfelt thanks & sincerest congratulations. Just knowing the children(that YOU are CHARGED with EDUCATING) are going recieve equal parts “Flying Spaghetti Monsterism” & equal parts of the so called “evolutionism”… warms the cockles of my heart.
.
I am however at this point, compelled to warn you of the arduous gauntlet you are about to run.Recently the Kansas school board sought to bring the glorious truth of the NoodleGod to its fine students. Unfortunately the board folded like a house of cards under the crushing weight of a most effective write-in campaign. This campaign was undoubtedly organized by angry, uneducated, biggoted & overzealous nutjobs!(in other words, EVANGELICAL christians.) Please do not be swayed by the pummelling or humiliation they absorbed.
.
Your utmost conviction & steadfastness will be mandator