“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
Notice how the Penis fits the had so well….
Wasn’t god against that sort of stuff?
A few days ago, I remembered something my brother said, which turned out to be about the FSM. I was led here (by Google) and eventually read your comment. I, personally, think it is very funny, because all of your arguments can be used against you. And they would probably be used better by a thirteen year-old kid (that’s me!). Now, a person cannot just say something like that and disappear, he has to back it up. So let’s see how I do, shall we?
The Coke example is exactly that, an example, yet still I am able to turn it around, though I must admit it wasn’t easy. I like to think of the Universe as the number pi. With its infinite numbers strewn about randomly (or supposedly random, maybe FSM has a favorite infinite digit number), it is very useful as a catalyst to use for teaching stupid people about the Universe. If you write down enough of the digits of pi, you’ll eventually find a very weird or unusual series of numbers, such as 000000000000000 or 0123456789876543210. Likewise, in the universe, I find it quite possible that a glob of natural Coke with a can, exactly as we know it, exists somewhere.
As for the banana, it, as a species, underwent a process some people like to call, evolution (e-və-ˈlü-shən if you’ve never heard that word before, which I don’t doubt). Evolution is a number of random genetic mutations that helps the organism to survive better than whatever the rest of its species has in its stead. And as time passes that organism and all of its offspring outlives (or just evolves away from) the previous species. That would be what had happened to the banana, every one of those mutations helped spread its seeds, which made more trees of this new type of banana.
Test One, likewise, also if you haven’t noticed, evolution of the eye probably took around ~50 million years. If I am wrong, my fellow Pastafarians after me will correct my mistake.
Test Two, do the automated machines that make pretty much all of the things around you count? Why do I even ask; you’re just going to say no, after all, I AM arguing with you.
Analogy Three, wait, what happened to One and Two? YOU tell ME, what are the chances of there being an absolute, all-powerful, ultimate, divine deity? Do you have ANY proof, other than the book that CLAIMS that some guy, who we KNOW FOR SURE is NOT crazy, CLAIMS that he is the son of THE God, which by the way was written ~200 years after the events occurred. How do you know that the bible was not meant to be fiction or just a book to teach some morals like Aesop’s Fables (just imagine that it’s underlined)? How do you know that the author/authors of the bible are telling the truth? How do you know Jesus isn’t just some crazy person with incredibly good luck? How do you know that the Jewish folk are wrong? How do you know that the events detailed in the bible are accurate? Is it because of the OTHER words in the SAME book that tell you that it’s true? If I told a story now, and everyone in the world heard it directly or indirectly; what are the chances that the last person to be told hears the same story that I dictated, How about 200 years from now?
Test Three, I don’t even understand what either one or two means, if someone tells me, I can add a supplement later. Part three, what are the chances that there are gods; what are the chances there is ONE God?
Test Four, “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.” To state that there IS a God…. “Is it possible that the knowledge you haven’t yet come across [in the giant circle of knowledge], that there might be ample evidence to prove that God does indeed exist?” Isn’t it possible that in the rest of the giant circle of knowledge that there is enough evidence to prove that God DOESN’T exist?
In Summary: (that colon is a grammatical misdemeanor) you need to think like your enemy; see your argument in their (my) eyes AND refine it, BEFORE you publish it and just hope you didn’t make a fool of yourself. Also, we know how electricity works.
Wow, lots of lame arguments thrown back at my friend Jon, who actually offered a series of sound, logical arguments to help some of you understand why we can’t believe there is no God. Some of you offered tired old arguments about “who created God” and all that. You should go back and read through it again.
There has not been enough TIME for the oranges to fall as described, just as there hasn’t been enough TIME for the universe to create itself, a logical impossibility anyway. Again, where did the MATTER come from that exploded? It has been widely accepted for the past few decades that the universe is not eternal, thus everything had a beginning. The nature of things does not lend itself to being compared to monkeys banging on typewriters, unless you throw in a variable like, every time the monkey hits a vowel, the typewriter explodes and kills everything within 20 yards. That’s more like what would happen chemically. C.S. Lewis, A.E. Wilder Smith, Mark Eastman, Kent Hovind. These are some great guys with some great information. If you want to know. Life = energy + matter + time? NO, my friends, otherwise you’d have evolution in cans of green beans. No, you also need INFORMATION. DNA. INTELLIGENCE. SOFTWARE. That’s what makes life.
Atheists (and people who start cynical little religions to make a point) can only convert the prideful and morally deficient because they don’t want to believe in God, because they want to do what THEY want, without conviction or moral restraint. People, humans, would rather make up wild stories to explain their Creator away than accept the blunt facts surrounding them. I sincerely hope you’ll take some of our comments to heart and think about them, but I fear that won’t happen. It’s much easier for one to make jokes, use vulgarity and throw stones to deflect any conviction one might feel.
Incidentally, I hope you won’t classify my email as “hate mail” because I don’t hate you. Thanks. Also, you people who are calling yourself Christians and are using profanity and such on this blog need to quit. You’re disgracing our Lord and making fools and hypocrites of yourselves. I also fully acknowledge that not all people who call themselves Christians are. See ya on judgment day, hopefully you’re on my side of the aisle. :) MATTHEW 25
By the way, a cave is not a building, the universe is not infinite, and yes the banana argument is weak, and thus easy to attack which explains why almost everyone here has decided to. Like a pack of lions attacking the weakest antelope who falls behind the herd. Easy target. Does anyone have anything of substance to offer? The oranges will never fall as described. You’ve put your faith in mathematics and chance and left moorings of sound judgment and common sense.
Cal: You don’t have to read Darwin’s Book to oppose the general ideas espoused therein. You’ve proven that yourself, unless you’ve actually read all 66 books by 40 different authors over thousands of years in the Bible. Please! “The odds are stacked in favor of evolution???” Are you thoroughly brainwashed then? Come to your senses! That’s only true in your chosen worldview. There is no evidence of macro-evolution except in the little bubble of a worldview you’ve built around yourselves. Your “religion” flies in the face of thousands of years of history, science, and human existence. The burden of proof is on you.
The thing you’re all missing is CONTEXT. You can’t pick and choose the facts you want and leave the rest of the surrounding circumstances.
Sorry, I’m done now. Don’t mean to hog the blog. :)
-By the way, a cave is not a building
If it wasn’t built how did it come into being, and on that subject where did the rest of the universe come from?
- the universe is not infinite,
Have you got any proof for this statement? Because it would settle one of the major questions physicists would like answered.
-and yes the banana argument is weak, and thus easy to attack which explains why almost everyone here has decided to. Like a pack of lions attacking the weakest antelope who falls behind the herd.
Evolution’s like that, we figure if we keep killing off stupid arguments they will eventually stop reproducing.
-Easy target. Does anyone have anything of substance to offer? The oranges will never fall as described.
Our argument does not predict oranges will fall in neat patterns, neither do we expect the red sea to part because someone waves a stick at it.
-You’ve put your faith in mathematics and chance and left moorings of sound judgment and common sense.Cal: You don’t have to read Darwin’s Book to oppose the general ideas espoused therein. You’ve proven that yourself, unless you’ve actually read all 66 books by 40 different authors over thousands of years in the Bible. Please! “The odds are stacked in favor of evolution???” Are you thoroughly brainwashed then? Come to your senses! That’s only true in your chosen worldview. There is no evidence of macro-evolution except in the little bubble of a worldview you’ve built around yourselves. Your “religion” flies in the face of thousands of years of history, science, and human existence.
I have to question why I am trying to use reason and logic with someone who can argue that thousands of years of history, science and experience disproves mathematics, probability and evolution; and also claim to have sound judgement and common sense. I’m also a bit jealous, I wish i could write that many logical fallacies and that much irony in so few words, chuck in a couple of jokes and it’s award winning satire.
-The burden of proof is on you.
It’s just as well that we have plenty of it then, from DNA to the fossil record, and it’s verifiable and reproducible. Your theory by comparison is blissfully unencumbered.
-The thing you’re all missing is CONTEXT. You can’t pick and choose the facts you want and leave the rest of the surrounding circumstances.
Although sm would ask us to ignore mathematics, other religions, the contradictory passages in the bible, and bananas.
Hmm, antelopes..the vegetarians nightmare
1. have a neck that fits in a lions jaw.
2. has a non-slip surface.
3. Has outward indicators of it’s inward contents. looks like an antelope-contains antelope.
4. Has a tab for removal of it’s wrapper. (I may have to check this one later)
5. Is perforated on wrapper. That’s after the lion has bit it.
6. Has a bio-degradable wrapper.
7. can feed a family of lions for one week.
8. And a flock of vultures.
9. Is pleasing to the taste buds.
10.Conveniently live near lions, surely only an idiot would think that this happened by chance.
To Jeff M
Apr 29th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
.
.
“Sorry, I’m done now. Don’t mean to hog the blog. :)”
Don’t worry, are you feeling better now?
.
“lots of lame arguments thrown back at my friend Jon, who actually offered a series of sound, logical arguments”
I disagree with you, most of the pastafarian arguments where logical, and Jon hadn’t any good argument. In fact most of the arguments exposed where explaining why we think Jon is a poor IDiot that doesn’t understand logic at all
.
“There has not been enough TIME for the oranges to fall as described”
Why? Because you say so? Sorry, hovind & company have given any prove of that, and I didn’t heard of it? How many time would have been necessary, according to your tests?
.
“Again, where did the MATTER come from that exploded?” Uff…silly…so the matter can’t come from nothing, unlike your god; what was doing god before he created the universe? And yes, as you have said, who created god? Is an argument used very often, since any IDiot couldn’t answer it
.
“It has been widely accepted for the past few decades that the universe is not eternal, thus everything had a beginning” Well, our universe seems not to be eternal, we doesn’t know yet if before the Big-Bang existed another universe - and a Big-Crunch. This process could be -or maybe not- eternal
.
” the typewriter explodes and kills everything within 20 yards” because you said so, again. I assume you are a statistician, aren’t you? With large knowledge about biology, and you have calculated each probability involved in any little process of life, in order to calculate it.
On the other hand, this killing and exploding is again the Bible-sadistic vision, isn’t it?
.
“NO, my friends, otherwise you’d have evolution in cans of green beans” Cans didn’t reproduce themselves. You could someday, if you find a suitable partner. Sorry…
.
“INFORMATION. DNA. INTELLIGENCE. SOFTWARE. That’s what makes life”. You didn’t understand anything about evolution, did you? Or you have a very poor imagination. And that’s again an statement, not an argument.
.
” the prideful and morally deficient because they don’t want to believe in God, because they want to do what THEY want, without conviction or moral restraint”
I have convictions and ethical “restraints”, withouth a Great Father in the Sky saying me what I shouldn’t do. Atheists aren’t -in general- amoral people. That’s a lie long repeated by fundies. In fact, the moral written in the bible is not the christian moral -for many of his branches- now. So, where did your moral come from??
.
“I sincerely hope you’ll take some of our comments to heart and think about them, but I fear that won’t happen. ” I hope the same for you. RAmen. (”hate mail” is also “concerned criticism”).
.
“Also, you people who are calling yourself Christians and are using profanity and such on this blog need to quit” Profanity is an archaic way to censore. ” I also fully acknowledge that not all people who call themselves Christians are” And each christian has -more or less- his own God. I will forget your reference to the judgement day, as we all will be drinking beer and having fun
.
“There is no evidence of macro-evolution except in the little bubble of a worldview you’ve built around yourselves. Your “religion” flies in the face of thousands of years of history, science, and human existence. The burden of proof is on you”
There is plenty of evidence of macro-evolution. Intermediate forms between species in the fossil register, the distribution of the different species, relationships in the DNA… Ask and it will be given. In fact, providing wrong evidences is a hobby of the FSM, and He has a lot of time and a lot of appendages.
That are our proofs, and yours? We should accept that, because it says so in the bible?
The bible doesn’t lies because is God’s word and it’s God’s word because it says so in the bible…
.
So, two posts ant your only real argument is that of the beginning, or nothing comes from nothing, unlike your god
@ Jeff M
sorry to dissapopint but i dont beleive in your “forgiving god” because she is a sadist, incest loving freak that would rather kill and torment eternally anyone that doesnt believe in her or follow her ways eternally, so piss of you cockmonkey, and enjoy your stale beer and VD. I cannot as a decent person beleive in any god that promotes violence based on faith, so before you condemn us for what you think, try actually thinking.
i would noramlly not say this but may you forever have stale beer and VD infested strippers.
@ Jeff M
First, thank you for correct spelling and grammar, and a measure of courtesy. That is often sadly lacking from the xtians who post here. I do want to reply to a few of your comments:
.
“You don’t have to read Darwin’s Book to oppose the general ideas espoused therein. You’ve proven that yourself, unless you’ve actually read all 66 books by 40 different authors over thousands of years in the Bible.”
.
You seem to assume most atheists have not read the bible. In general, this is not the case. I, myself, have read it cover to cover, twice, in two different translations. (And I’ve read Darwin too, thank you.) Many atheists were originally xtians, but it was only once they actually READ their “holy book” that they realized that they could no longer believe in it.
.
“People, humans, would rather make up wild stories to explain their Creator away than accept the blunt facts surrounding them.”
.
You can just as easliy say that people would rather make up wild creator stories then accept that they don’t yet understand all the blunt facts surrounding them.
.
“Atheists (and people who start cynical little religions to make a point) can only convert the prideful and morally deficient because they don’t want to believe in God, because they want to do what THEY want, without conviction or moral restraint.”
.
Also, generally not true. (How many atheists do you actually know personally?) Most atheists I know are much more ethical than the average true believer. Since we do not believe in a forgiving god, we have to live with the consequences of our own actions. We also cannot justify evil acts by pretending that they are the “will of god”. And we can’t “convert” anybody. We can live our lives in a way that shows that the ugly stereotypes put out by fundamentalists are untrue. We can demonstrate that it is possible to find meaning and purpose in life without belief in the supernatural. We can suggest that people should not fear to think things out for themselves. But believers usually de-convert individually, often only after thinking long and deeply about their beliefs, and not from being preached at, or “converted”.
.
One of the lovely things about this website is that it allows us to hold a mirror up to fundamentalist preaching. If we substitute FSM language into your arguments, and if they sound just as rational, then how good were your arguments to begin with? Like this:
.
“The odds are stacked in favor of Intelligent Design???” Are you thoroughly brainwashed then? Come to your senses! That’s only true in your chosen worldview. There is no evidence of creationism except in the little bubble of a worldview you’ve built around yourselves. Your “religion” flies in the face of thousands of years of history, science, and human existence.”
.
See, the argument sounds just as valid this way.
.
“The burden of proof is on you. The thing you’re all missing is CONTEXT. You can’t pick and choose the facts you want and leave the rest of the surrounding circumstances.”
.
No - the burden of proof is on you. You ask us to believe in an invisible, all-powerful, all-knowing, loving god, who reveals himself only through an ancient and highly contradictory text, who never reveals himself today in any specifically measurable way, and who allows evil things to happen to his believers just as often as to anybody else. This is an extraordinary claim, and as such, requires extraordinary proof. Considering the state of the world, I find the idea that it was created by a drunken FSM, who does not really care whether you believe in him, who wants you to talk like a pirate, and who changes the results of scientific experiments because he feels like it, much more easily believable. AND you can’t prove it’s false. Hurrah for cynical little religions!
.
As for picking and choosing your facts - I have a few bible references for you. Go look these up:
Judges 1:19
Leviticus 25:44-46
Deuteromy 22:23-24
Joshua 6:21
Mark 11:22
I won’t tell you what to think about these passages from your own holy book. I just suggest that you actually DO think about them. Before you accuse others of “picking and choosing the facts you want”, be sure that you are not also yourself guilty of the same. Or, for what your book has to say on the subject: read Mark 6:41-42.
.
I don’t need to live in a world full of people who think the same way I do. But I would like to live in a world full of people who THINK.
.
RAmen
Jeff M,
I’d have found it easier to process your argument on a logical basis if you had not proceeded to state facts which are blatantly untrue, specifically: “Atheists (and people who start cynical little religions to make a point) can only convert the prideful and morally deficient because they don’t want to believe in God, because they want to do what THEY want, without conviction or moral restraint.” Atheists, in general, are not morally deficient; we simply base or morals on something other than “God said so”. Murder, for example, is a bad idea - not because God said so but because humans function better in societies where murder is not tolerated. Charity, as another example, is a good idea - not because God said so but because humans function better in societies where people are willing to collaborate and help others when they are in need. As for the rest of what you posted, I’ll pay attention to that when you can cease insulting me.
RAmen, Sarah
Jeff, friend, you are wrong. You clearly have a view of evolution that makes it spontaneous. Evolution does not happen in a can of beans because there is no selection criteria. If I were to put a bacteria that consumed beans in the can and there happened to be one left afterwards and planted it you could end up with a new kind of bean that is resistant to this bacteria. I would need to grow these new beans but if i were to can these beans and do it again, the process would continue and this is evolution. But it requires a selection criteria. The argument that there is no proof of macro evolution is bunk. I would like for you to look up a fossil called Tiktaalik. Tiktaalik is a transitional fossil found between fish and amphibians. If you are with the FSM we have a perfectly logical explanation for this, the FSM has divinely created Tiktaalik to keep his/her powers hidden. But if you are someone who is looking for proof of macro evolution your going to have to understand that you are never going to be able to see it. As someone who believes in talking snakes, magical staves and water walking, the idea of a fossil having at one point been alive should not be a stretch. If you believe that it is Atheists who act “without conviction or moral restraint” I recommend the Pardoner’s Tale in the Canterbury Tales. If your not a fan of Chaucer look at your pudgy evangelists and see where their hearts are. Countless deaths have been justified in the name of just about every God and every Prophet, the hands of theists are unclean. If a man kills me for God how do I know it is not His will? God has ordered the deaths of many, Moses’s (alleged) dispatching of the Amorites proves this. What I can do for you Jeff is tell you that there is a God. I hope that makes you feel better. There is a great mover in the universe. Now, the burden of proof is on you to prove that this God had children. I need some proof that there were talking snakes and magic immortality gardens. I need to know that before the 10 Commandments people were wildly killing each other, that before God said “don’t kill” people were unsure of its morality. And don’t forget…world destroying floods! The loving God that kills all but 2 of everything, praise his justice! The spectacular thing about the scientific world is that you do not know everything. And you cannot go to one scientist for every answer. If you ask an astrophysicist about evolution you may not get a good answer. In the future it will be within the human understanding what happened before the Big Bang. And we will come to a common theme; religion will have to contort itself once again to justify its near useless existence. If I have faith in anything, I have faith in humanity. I believe that people don’t need the threat of divine punishment or reward to do good. The divinity of bananas is a horrible argument. You don’t dismiss it, you just rephrase it.
Bananas? What about apples, oranges, cranberries, blueberries, strawberries, Starfruit and kiwi fruit?
Stop picking on bananas! You’re being fruitist!
None of the other fruits above have ‘been made to suit our hands’ so why should bananas be any different? Is that the Theist’s nightmare?
You seem to think that your god said ‘Hey, this idea for bananas, well they don’t sound very conventional do they? Well okay, pass me one [pauses to rub his hands up and down it to make the grooves]. There we go: Banana!’ But what you don’t seem to clarify is why ‘God’ didn’t seem to bother with any of the other fruits.
The other thing is, some of the bananas I get have completely round skins! A lot of people I know don’t like them, so they AREN’T ‘pleasing’.
Next you will be saying bananas are easy to cut so you can make Banana Sundaes!
MAJOR flaws in your theory.
RAmen
I’ve got this banana that curves away from my mouth…
What’s with that???!?
To almost everyone here; you need to learn some basic grammar, spelling, and forum etiquette. Sure, a mistake here and there is acceptable, we’re human, but when you make the same mistake over and over again, some of us might think that you don’t know what you’re writing. The saddest part is, the Christian “IDiots” have a better track record than the people that have enough intelligence to realize that Pastafarianism did not start as something people were supposed to follow (but who knows what it is now).
You seem to think that evolution is completely random. Like, if you threw a bunch of random cells into the air, they’d fall down and create a perfect human. This is not the case. It’s more like, if you had a bag of marbles of a thousand different colours, and wanted a red one, and started picking out marbles randomly and every time you took one out, you put one in of one of the colours already in the bag but NOT one of the colours outside the bag. It’s a bad analogy, I know, but it’s all I can think of at the moment.
Also, if we took that same bag and wanted a red marble again, you could say that it’s very very unlikely to get a red marble. But you could say that about a blue marble or a yellow one or a green one. Evolution isn’t determined to get our exact DNA, it’s to come up with an animal that can live well in the environment it evolved in. Maybe, if something had happened just slightly different, we would be giant talking dogs walking around, with people crawling around doing tricks for food.
The Religious persons nightmare:
ALL OF SCIENCE!
First I was mad, than I understood. You’re simply an uneducated retard. You believe anything you’re told in church, or by a religious official. You don’t understand. Natural selection is the exact opposite of chance. For an eye to be created by chance is absurd, and so it wasn’t. It was created over millions of years by the process of natural selection, which in the end created a better eye each time it happened. in the end, we have the eyes of today, eyes suited to each individual animal that has them.
You are right, poster. It is much more likely that a giant invisible man in the sky decided that he would make human beings out of dirt, then stop talking to them forever.
Im not sure if you realise this, but yes the banana has an intelligent creator. It is, quite simply, a human made fruit. You know, you can breed plants as well as animals.
the bible says god create the earth in 7 days. that is the biggest joke ever. and took sunday free.. jejeje where are the 4.5 billions of years of earth evolution proved by sience. there is solid fisical evidence of eart evolution. christians claim that earth is 20.000 years old (far away from reality) where the dinosaurs in the bible?
dear henderob,
hmm … billions of years ago, an old bearded person in the sky shout “kun fayakun” (or whatever) and then the universe of watery world is made. after a while, he thought that the land should be separated from the water, and so the land dried and the water form the ocean, and the horizon separated the sky and the ground. and then, he decided to illuminate the sky, so he created the stars, the sun and the moon for the sake of this new world at the sky surrounding it. sometime later, he also thought that light should be separated from the dark (so it was once united? /swt), and so there be day and night (i’m sorry, what’s the sun created for?). blablabla yaddayaddayadda, then the human was made.
sorry for my bad english, it’s not my mother language.
consider this is the truth … and i am so BELIEVE with something designed by something intelligent, then i’m also SURE that the old bearded man in the sky was also designed by something else too. but, who could it be? can you please illuminate this petty peasant with your so called wisdom? :)