“Billions of years ago, a big bang produced a large rock. As the rock cooled, sweet brown liquid formed on it’s surface. As time passed, aluminum formed itself into a can, a lid, and a tab. Millions of years later, red and white paint fell from the sky and formed itself into the words “Coca Cola… 12 fluid ounces.”Of course my theory is an insult to your intellect, because you know that if the Coca Cola can is made, there must be a maker. If it is designed, there must be a designer. The alternative, that it happened by chance or accident is to move from the intellectual free zone.
Here is another:
“The Banana: The Atheist Nightmare”
Note that the banana…
1. is shaped for the human hand.
2. has a non-slip surface.
3. Has outward indicators of it’s inward contents. Green - too early, yellow - just right, black - too late.
4. Has a tab for removal of it’s wrapper.
5. Is perforated on wrapper.
6. Has a bio-degradable wrapper.
7. Is shaped for the human mouth.
8. Has a point at the top for ease of entry.
9. Is pleasing to the taste buds.
10. Is curved towards the face to make the eating process easy.
To write that the banana happened by accident is even more unintelligent than to write that no one designed the Coca Cola can.
Test 1.
The person who thinks the Coca Cola can has no designer is:
A. Intelligent
B. A fool
C. Has an ulterior motive for denying the obvious
Now the document that I am referring from states that the eye has 40,000,000 nerve endings and focuses it’s muscles approximately 100,000 times a day. and that the eye has a retina that contains approximately 137,000,000 light sensitive cells.
The document continues and states that Charles Darwin stated:
“To suppose that the eye could have been formed by natural selection, seems I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree” Agreed… it does not have the reference recorded so I do not know if this statement is true or false. But let me get to the point at hand.
If man can not create the human eye then how can anyone in their right mind believe that it was created by chance? In fact… man can’t create anything from nothing… we just do not know how to do it. We can re-create, reform, develop… but we can not create one grain of sand from nothing. Yet the human eye… is a mere tiny part of the most sophisticated part of creation - the human body.
Again… another statement which I would have to research and verify if this person actually made this comment:
“George Gallup; “If I could prove God statistically; take the human body alone; the chance that all the functions of the individual would just happen, is a statistical monstrosity.”
Now this statement concerning Albert Einstein. This is confusing… why would this man contradict himself? If he stated this… then every other statement that has been quoted at this forum is invalid because the man appears to be speaking from both sides of his mouth. In this statement Einstein is quoted to have said:
“Everyone who is seriously interested in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe - a spirit vastly superior to man, and one in the face of our modest powers must feel humble.”
Test 2:
1. Do you know any building that did not have a builder? Yes? No?
2. Do you know any painting that did not have a painter? Yes? No?
3. Do you know any car that did not have a maker? Yes? No?
If you answered “Yes” to any of those statements… please give details:______________________…
Third analogy:
Could I convince you that I dropped 50 oranges onto the ground and then by chance fell into ten rows of five oranges? Logically, anyone with an intelligent mind might conclude that someone put them there. The odds that ten oranges would fall into a straight line is mind boggling. Let alone ten rows of five.
Test 3
Yes or No 1. From the atom to the universe is there order?
Yes or No 2. Did it happen by accident or must there been an intelligent mind?
3. What are the odds of 50 oranges falling by chance into ten rows of five oranges? ______________________________…
To declare that there is no God is to make an absolute statement. And for an absolute statement to be true; one must have absolute knowledge. Here is another such statement: “There is no gold in China.”
Test 4 What would I need to have for that statement to be true?
A. No knowledge of China?
B. Partial knowledge of China?
C. Absolute knowledge of China?
“C” is the correct answer. In order for the statement to be true, I must know that there is no gold in China.
Likewise; to state that there is no God and to be correct then you are stating that you are omniscient. You must have absolutely certain knowledge that there isn’t one.
Let’s say that a circle contains all the knowledge of the universe. And let’s say that you have an incredible understanding of one percent of all that knowledge. Is it possible that the knowledge you haven’t yet come across, that there might be ample evidence to prove that God does indeed exist?
If you are reasonable, you would have to admit, “Having the limited knowledge I have at present, I believe that there is no God.” In other words, you don’t know if God exists, so you are not an atheist. You are an “agnostic.” You are like a person that looks at a building and doesn’t seem to know if there is a builder.
Test 5 The man who sees a building and doesn’t know if there is a builder is:
A. Intelligent
B. A fool
C. Has an ulterior motive
In summary: There are plenty of things that we have faith in that we do not fully understand. Most of us do not have a complete understanding that when you turned your computer on as to why it worked. You took a step of faith that turning it on… that somehow that it would work. You accept the unseen electrical waves that appear right in front of your eyes when you type your comments here. We do not see the reason for why the messages appear… because the powers that be are invisible to the naked eye. For them to be manifest, we need a monitor… so we can enjoy the experience of this forum.
God is not flesh and blood; He is an eternal Spirit. Immortal and invisible… like the computer waves. He can can not be experienced unless the monitor is turned on. One should approach the Bible in the same way as the monitor. If it works, enjoy it and if it doesn’t, forget it.
Or do you have an ulterior motive? Could it be that the “atheist” can’t find God… as a thief can’t find the policeman? Could it be that your logic is clouding your good judgment?”
-Jonathon
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
Odd thing about chances, they tend to happen anyways. In an infinitely large universe, all odds will happen all the time forever.
LOL http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLqQttJinjo
Ever think that the human hand was made to fit the banana?
skinimini, the bit about being “Truly Blind”, have I heard that somewhere?
Sounds like a similar argument to that of a Richard Dawkins book…
——-
Anyway, to the important stuff.
Apologies for not relating this to bananas and coke cans, some people (namely the author of the article I’m writing this about) may have difficulty understanding the point being made here.
I may have missed something, but which part of the bible mentions dinosaurs?
Evidently, dinosaur fossils arrived there some how, but in no circumstances have we found human fossils in the same place as dinosaur fossils to suggest that they co-existed.
However, for this to be true, it would mean that there were dinosaurs a long time before humans.. So if the world was created in 7days (and humans on the 6th), doesn’t this prove the bible to be incorrect?
I genuinely want to hear an opposing side of the story to this.
I am an agnostic, and prefer to keep an open mind. I only disagree with those who try to force a belief upon somebody.
pre- domestication banana http://www.dasmirnov.net/media/users/paul/PBF_02_3_image_04_full.jpg
CPT DanK
Well……Why does the painter, builder, maker or otherwise have to be God???? Why can’t it be the Goddess, the Big Bang, Satan, or whatever other religious figures. Why do we have to believe that the designer is God? Hell, why can’t we all believe that the Flying Spaghetti Monster created us? Oh wait…we can! So, I’m wasting my time. You can believe that God created you, I can believe that the great mother Goddess created me, and they can believe that the Flying Spaghetti monster did it all. It is our right and our freedom. Why do a lot of Christians waste their time with trying to change people? Is the number of Christians decreasing? Is that why you spend so much time trying to change what makes us happy? Or do you feel it is your religious obligation? To save us from “hell”? Stop brainwashign our minds and live your life how you want to…and let us do the same.
-Leah
P.S. hope you enjoyed that bit from an 11 year old :)
20 Reasons why Jonathon is dumb-must read through entire article to understand why this person is so dumb
1. A banana is just one edible item on this Earth. How many other edible things are on this Earth? Thousands? How many of them are like bananas? VERY FEW. So, if your ‘god’ exists, why did he not design every edible thing like that? Oh, wait, never mind. I’m sure he just wants to “test us”, and not make life “too easy”.
2. Ever think that maybe the banana adapted to its environment maybe- e.g. it needs a peel to protect it from damage.
3. Your banana argument proves that evolution does exist. (Bio-degradable wrapper to fertilize soil).
4. How many plants/fruits/vegetables aren’t biodegradable?
5. What’s all this accident stuff? Why are creationists (or ID “scientists) so ignorant? Evolution is NOT ACCIDENTAL!!! Who says Evolution was an accident? YOU!
6. I’m going to disprove your Coca-Cola argument in 3 words- Coca Cola Company. They have come out and said they have created Coca-Cola. When God creates a “Universe Creation Inc.”, let me know.
7. The eye. The only possible “flaw” in the theory of evolution (according to creationists). Evolution can explain the eye though. The eye didn’t just appear as it is today. No. It evolved, from sensing light, to sensing light and shade, then to rough shapes, then to more detailed shapes and colours, etc.
8. Here we go with that “chance” stuff again.
9. You are right. We can’t create a grain of sand from nothing. But we can create sand from small stones, which are created from larger stones, which are created from even bigger stones, etc.
10. In terms of the Albert Einstein comment, why is it so hard for people to understand what a metaphor is? Met-a-for- “a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something which is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblence”-Dictionary.com . To anyone with an IQ over 100, it is obvious he is talking about evoultion and development- not God.
11. Again, we get the test, which is obviously misinterpreting creation, because if you can see proof of its designer (proof as in, see it being built), then you know it’s designed.
12.Ah yes. The oranges reference, also misinterpreting the argument. Let me put it this way; instead of doing one test of dropping 50 oranges, do billions.
13. Isn’t it strange, that he keeps referencing “anyone with an intelligent mind”, although all the truly “intelligent minds” in the world are atheist or agnostic (or at least evolution believers?)
14. I’d like to answer question 3. On Test 3:
3. What are the odds of 50 oranges falling by chance into ten rows of five oranges?
Less than a billion.
15. A more accurate statement for Test 4 would be- There is no gold floating around in outer space. It’s called common sense.
16. I love how this person is talking about evidence, obviously oblivious to the fact that THERE IS NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER CONCLUDING GOD EXISTS (or is even likely). THERE IS LOTS OF EVIDENCE THAT EVOLUTION IS A REALITY, AND ALSO THAT GOD DOES NOT EXIST.
17. For Test 5, instead of saying the same thing over and over (if you want, see my number 11), I will say that those who are athiests are generally very intelligent, so of coarse you would conclude they are all fools.
18. Isn’t it a little convienent that god is invisible and immortal and chooses not to contact us???
19. How exactly do you turn the monitor “on” anyway?
20. The reference “Could it be that the “atheist” can’t find God… as a thief can’t find the policeman?” is a new quote to me. I’m not used to being called a thief. I’m more used to being called “the devil”.
Alana, why the obscenity? Do our views so offend you that you feel the need to compensate by bringing forth a veritable avalance of profanity? Come on, show some respect. I’m a Christian and I agree that the banana example is a weak one; however, there are other cases for intelligent design. For example, the structure of flagella on several bacteria.
It is often said ‘judge the religion by its book, not by its believers,’ and it is a shame that some people do end up exploiting religions. But at its heart, Christianity is a religion of understanding and tolerance - what is offensive about that?
What, precisely, does prude mean? I’m not familiar with Yankee slang…
Promiscuity has lead to a drastic rise in the proliferation of STIs, and the breakdown of family life. If sexual intercourse is unrestricted, then what value does marriage have? Or what relevance does family have? If you want to defend your right to catch syphilis from whoever you want then go ahead, but surely it’s madness to support a society that condones such behaviour?
O’Bryan, I don’t necessarily take Genesis to be totally literal: perhaps God didn’t make the world in precisely seven days, but He created the world none-the-less. As for dinosaurs, just because they aren’t mentioned, doesn’t mean that they disprove anything the Bible says. “And God said, Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind. And it was so.” (Genesis 1:24) No specific creatures are mentioned here. Since we’re not taking Genesis’ timescale literally, remember, this leaves quite a scope for dinosaurs to have been created and then to fall into extinction before the creation of Man.
Our logic CLOUDING our good judgement?
Surely logic is the best form of judgement.
Pointed tip for ease of entry? wtf is this guy using a banana for?
what silly arguments, “bananas taste good because god made them to taste good to us!”
If you do not understand why the world is in order then you obviously know nothing about evolution or ecology.
At first let me say to the author of the original article: You really missed the point of the evolution theory. So please, before you try to disprove it, try to understand it first. And understanding doesn´t mean to read about it in an ID - book!
I came across an argument concerning the flagella of bacteria. This is one of the BIG arguments of ID-people to disprove evolution. So before I start with the explanation, make sure you understood the evolution theory before you read it.
One ID argument against evolution is the following one: Flaggella of bacteria (with which they move around) are made out of about 30 types of Proteins. Every protein is essential for the function of the flagella movement. So it has to be created as one unit, and can´t have evolved peace by peace. So say the creationists. I heard this a while ago and thought: That´s easy to explain, because what they don´t understand (or do understand but don´t say) is the following:
We only see what is today, we don´t see how it started. As an example: Take a wheel and spin it. It will spin. Now take a cog wheel and apply it to the wheel. Spin the cog, and the other wheel will spin too. Now if you add a second cog wheel and spin it, the effect will be the same, the wheel at the end will spin. Now one after the other, you add cogs until you have 30 of them in a row. If you spin the last one, the original wheel will spin, too. But if you remove ANY wheel in the line, nothing will happen, because every wheel has now become essential to the system.
For those who say: Why should there be a second cog after the first one, it doesn´t improve the system!”
IT`S AN EXAMPLE (we can also assume the wheels get bigger in the line so you need less force to spin the original wheel)
There is no *hard evidence* proving that God does not exist. Science is merely an evidence-based form of faith: faith that the future resembles the past, and so on.
An whilst not accidental per se, evolution is random, therefore un-testable, therefore unscientific. Scientific theories must be able to be shown to be false - there is no method of proving evolution true or false. And besides, who says evolution disproves God? Couldn’t God adapt His creations from time to time? Perhaps He likes a bit of change?
Of all the hate mail, this is the funniest. This person uses tests and logic to refute FSMism and to try to prove God’s existence. As if for thousands of years for the answers have eluded us, proof has remained hidden, our logic was wrong… then this guy has an epiphany while comtemplating his banana and now there can be no doubt. Tests and logic are why so many people DON’T believe in god. I really enjoy the irony.
I’m so tired of these people who point at wonderful things and then say, “see, HE must exist!” Evolution, probability, chemistry, physics. These are all pretty amazing things. And they do a wonderful job explanining most of our universe. Just because we don’t have every answer doesn’t mean that there must be a god. It just means we’re not smart enough or haven’t had enough time to crack the problem. That’s all. The theory of the coke can though, that really got me going. I wonder if this dude is really George Carlin just getting laughs at our expense. What a clown!
But seriously, look up the definition of “satire” please.
Deep down, I think that most athiests are really agnostics. Too many people confuse their logic on both sides of the fence and stand to firmly on the shakey ground. Just because we don’t think your evidence proves a damn thing other than you are pretty superstitious doesn’t mean that we believe that there CAN’T be a god. We just THINK there probably ISN’T. The key here is to understand the nuances in the symantics. Of course we don’t KNOW. I believe that there is only one being who KNOWS the answer.. or there are none. Neither you nor me.
PS, funny bit of irony: If a Christian goes to his grave believing that his God is waiting for him in the afterlife, he’ll know if he was right but he will never know if he was wrong.
By the way, I’m allergic to bananas… There’s some irony! God designed the perfect fruit and then made me unable to eat it.
I’m also allergic to tree nuts, celery, carrots, melons, avocado, kiwi, lettuce…
I’d be a terrible Christian.
*Sigh*
It’s a shame when a person’s faith boils down to the schematics of a banana. Christianity is a wonderful religion - look at all of it’s bright and intellectual students!
(this is something someone once said about this and it made me laugh)
If the banana was created by God for us, then the pineapple was God’s way of saying F-ck you!
What if I am deathly allergic to bananas?
Deductively Invalid.
Are watches designed?
Yes.
Why?
Because there IS an object made by humans.
Is nature designed?
It looks to be.
Why?
Because everything has a maker.
Why?
…
Man-made things are designed by man. It doesn’t mean that if something looks to be designed it then must be designed. You are trying to prove that. Do it.