Academic Endorsements – page 3

I have now read and reread the information on Flying Spaghetti Monsterism (FSM) and I have to admit that it is frankly on par with (and in many ways superior to) the alternative proposed by the Kansas School Board. Having been employed by a school district in the state of Utah in the past, I can speak from experience when it comes to the mixture of education and religion. If Intelligent Design (ID) is accepted by the Board we will fight to have FSM accepted as well, and, once this has been accomplished, I am certainly willing to assist in the training of the Kansas school psychologists in the philosophy of FSM, if the ministers and pirates of the Church find me worthy.

As closing note, as a clinical psychologist and newly devoted disciple of FSM, I am going to write and suggest to the APA (American Pasta Association) that we replace the current diagnostic and statistical manual, the DSM-IV, with the FSM-IV. That way if our clients don’t like our diagnoses, they can eat them.
–Lynne Anne Daurelle, Ph.D.

As a historic buildings surveyor I help conserve a number of places of worship during the course of my work. I would draw you and your readers’ attention to the sometimes shabby condition of the buildings that Pastafarians frequent to imbibe His wheat-based message. I implore all true believers to instigage a regular Sunday morning pilgrimage to their local all-you-can-worship ristorante or pizzaria. Remember to tip well to ensure these sacred sites are preserved for future generations.
–Matt Green, PhD.

As a former research scientist using carbon dating, I was taken with your explanation of the FSM controlling the mechanics of carbon dating. It now seems obvious to me that the FSM must control the apparent half lives of all other radio isotopes, and similarly manipulates experimental results to produce the ages He wishes us to see. What gives me tremendous respect for the FSM is that He clearly does this with a master plan in mind, such that ‘dates’ from entirely different isotope systems are all in miraculous agreement with one another. Especially amazing is that samples from geographically different locations, deemed to be from the same geological age on the basis of common fossils produce the same dates. This clever manipulation gives the impression of the evolution of progressively more advanced life forms through time, when the obvious truth is that the smarter creatures ran higher up in the mountains to escape the great [spaghetti sauce?] flood. Clearly the FSM is omnipresent and omnipotent, and carefully rearranges results not to merely befuddle scientists, but to create a carefully sculpted and internally consistent picture of the age and history of the earth such as He wants us to see it. This is truly the hallmark of THE supreme being. Making a watch is nothing in comparison to actually manipulating isotopic ratios. Truly we are blessed to be the product of His Noodly Appendage!
– Brandon Beierle, Ph.D.

As both a minister and a scientist, I agree with you that there is no place in the science curriculum for ID or related pseudo-scientific theories of how humans came to be. Evolution is the scientific explanation for life on earth. If schools are going to include “alternative theories” in the curriculum that are not based upon the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment, then FSMism is as good ID, so I support efforts 100%.
–Rev. E. Wayne Ross, Ph.D.

I am writing to support the inclusion of FSM in the Kansas school curriculum. Your writings on the teachings of the FSM as creator of the universe are as credible and valid as the views promoted by the followers of ID theory. As a sociologist, I believe that research must also be conducted on the rising popularity of low-carbohydrate diets. I suspect there is a strong correlation between this trend and the persecution of those who support the teachings of FSM. I hope the Kansas School Board will promote inclusion and tolerance by teaching FSM theories.
–Stephannie C. Roy, Ph.D.

As a geneticist trained in evolutionary biology, I am deeply familiar with most of the substantial scientific uncertainties inherent in evolutionary understanding. These uncertainties, of course, relate
to precise mechanisms, timings, rates and sequences of events, not in the underlying facts of historical and ongoing evolution.

As a scientist, I am also passingly familiar with the uncertainties concerning global warming which also relate to the precise mechanisms, timings, rates and sequences of events, not in the underlying facts of historical and ongoing global warming.

However, until I read your enlightening website, it never occurred to me that these two phenomena might share deeper more profound similarities.

The logical theory you present is highly thought provoking and worthy of great interest. As I believe this is approximately the standard currently being advocated by the Kansas School Board
to warrant teaching in the public schools, I certainly hope these stimulating ideas are taught along side all other theories meeting that standard.
– David J. Cutler, Ph. D.

Both the existence and power of His Noodleness have long been recognized — if sometimes unconsciously — by many diverse sources. Fortunately, the lucid tools of postmodern analysis can make that evidence visible and irrefutable. Here are just a few examples. (1) Sir Walter Scott’s famous line “Oh what a tangled web we weave” contains an unmistakable reference to spaghetti — the substance of our Lordship. (2) Close observers of human behavior will note that Italians have long de facto recognized pastafarianism as a serious competitor to Catholicism, practicing the former more frequently and with even greater gusto. (3) The song “Yankee Doodle” celebrates His Noodleness, even capturing His amazing ability to create Himself out of a decorated headpiece through a mere change of nomenclature. (4) The very name of the famous Chicago-based Pizzeria Uno embeds a belief in the Oneness of Him. (5) When computer scientists speak of “spaghetti code”, their reference to something incomprehensible by humans serves to heighten the gulf between our finite minds and His omniscience, as does (6) the often-heard remonstration “Use your noodle”. (7) The common phrase “It went over like a wet noodle” clearly refers to His continual surveyance of all from Above.

With such honorable and compelling credentials, pastafarianism cannot be dismissed out of hand. It is certainly on an equal evidential footing with ID and deserves incorporation into any school curriculum that insists upon teaching ID. Besides, the FSM has the advantage of being much more palatable. “Opt for farfalle, not far-fetched. With Him all things are pastable.”
–Charles E. M. Dunlop, Ph.D.

When I saw your story on the Flying Spaghetti Monster, I immediately did what any thinking person would do when coming across something published on a website, that is, took it seriously as a valid scientific theory. But any theory, even one so seemingly self-evident as the FSM theory, requires testing, and I realized the data necessary to validate the theory is right on your page. I’m speaking of course of the relationship between pirates and global warming. It seems obvious from your graph that pirates have been actively preventing global warming, and as the number of pirates diminishes, they are less able to influence climate change. But why would pirates be concerned about global warming? Think of every pirate story you’ve ever read, what do they all have in common? (Well, besides the eye-patches, and the parrots, and the Arrrrgghhs, etc.) Buried treasure. And where is the treasure always buried? On the shore of some uninhabited island. No doubt you can see where this is going – if the climate warms, the sea levels rise, and the pirates can no longer find their treasure which is now underwater. Even their treasure maps would no longer be useful. Does evolutionary theory or Intelligent Design explain this relationship? I think not. So we have a possible, reasonable-sounding explanation for some part of the unconfirmed data you’ve selectively included in your theory. Our experience with Intelligent Design shows us is all that is needed to elevate anything from a simple hypothetical musing to a legitimate theory which deserves to be taught in the classroom. I hope this helps in your quest to spread the gospel, err, I mean, fundamental scientific law, of FSM to all thinking Kansans and other Americans.
–Dave Williams

In His infinite wisdom, the Flying Spaghetti Monster understands that, to a scientist, gravity is a theory. While members of the Intelligent Design Institute, the Flat Earth Society, and the Center for the Study of Intelligent Falling have a right to their views, they ought not to expect that their views be taught as science in a public school. The Great Noodly One knows that although faith may provide a moral lens through which to examine the results of scientific inquiry, human beings (and pasta-based deities) would be mistaken to see science as a threat to religion.

Finally, I would add that if Kansas schools (or any other public schools) are going to teach Intelligent Design as science, then they should clearly include the teachings of the First United Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. And, though there will be Pastafarians who disagree with me, I think that these schools should also include the theories of the Reformed Church of Alfredo and of the Cult of Oregano. That said, some ideas are too silly for even the Kansas public schools. For this reason, I would argue that we keep the Church of the Invisible Pink Unicorn out of the science curriculum. I mean, come on, now — that’s ridiculous!
– Philip Nel, Ph.D. , Associate Professor of English, Kansas State University

I am a practicing scientist, trained in drawing conclusions from data. I am happy to attest that the evidence in favor of Flying Spaghetti Monsterism is as compelling as the evidence in favor of any other faith. For this reason, Flying Spaghetti Monsterism should certainly be given equal time in the science classes of any society that wishes to place faith-based teachings on an equal basis with teachings based on scientific evidence. Flying Spaghetti Monsterism may well provide the solid basis on which the good children of Kansas can build a just, rational, and virtuous life.
–Chris Westbury, Ph.D

In the realm of creation myths, Flying Spaghetti Monsterism provides an incredibly comprehensive explanation for the Universe and life within it. If such myths are to be cast in the guise of theories and taught in science class, it is indeed only fair to teach Flying Spaghetti Monsterism along side other “theories” such as Intelligent Design. If and when this happens, Flying Spaghetti Monsterism is quite likely to become the Creation Education Sensation that sweeps the Nation.

Children everywhere will realize the elegant explanatory power of Flying Spaghetti Monsterism. They will undoubtedly see Intelligent Design and other creation myths as the frauds that they are. This is simply an unavoidable outcome of the logical link between pirates and mathematics which is as follows:

Mathematics is the language of the Universe, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster looks favorably upon pirates. Now, every school kid knows, and many adults have forgotten, that a pirate’s favorite subject to study in school is nothing other than…AAAARRRRR-ithmetic!

Coincidence? I think not.
–Gregory Sword, Ph.D

It occurred to me, while enjoying a carb-tastic bowl of Southeast Asian noodles [note that most of the world's remaining pirates are from this region], that the real-world academic support for Intelligent Design (non-Christian-think-tank) is very slim — really just two guys. Just looking through your site, it is clear that Flying Spaghetti Monsterism has significantly greater support among the academic community, leaving any school board with little reason to preference the teaching of ID in schools. Certainly, it seems clear that Pastafarianism has at very least the same amount of supporting evidence as Intelligent Design, (as does, unfortunately, my wife’s heretical belief in an all-knowing Pizza Squid which, though it can not be dismissed on the basis of available evidence, is clearly wrong.)

Yet it was also revealed to me, by the noodly touch of our divine-alicious creator, that His whimsical deception runs deeper than just faking the fossil record or manipulating the half-life of carbon to screw with paleontologists. No, in addition to falsifying all observable evidence itself, I believe he created the very concepts of reason and logic as an hilarious joke at the expense of those who deny His almighty meatyness. The very tools with which we crudely attempt to discern fact from fiction in the world around us — the Scientific Method itself — are clever tricks meant to trick the unfaithful into lives of frustration and bewilderment. It is only when one denounces logic and reason themselves that the saucy veil is lifted, and the noodly Truth is made plain.
–G.S. Barkin, Ph.D, Asst. Professor of Anthropology

FSM is as good a set of beliefs as any religion. It belongs with ID, creationism, and all other religious beliefs in a comparative religion class. These theories to not try to answer scientific questions. Science asks: what is happening and how is it happening. Science is a process by which we observe and try to understand how things work; theories in science are based on evidence and empirical data. Science does not try to answer anything about who or what made the universe the way it is. Religion, on the other hand, is all about who created the universe and why the universe is the way it is.

FSM is a perfectly valid set of religious tenets and we should respect the beliefs of all Pastafarians and we should respect the religion beliefs of all people. However, the study of religion does not belong in science class.
–Alison Bernstein

The first bottle of Lambrusco I chugged in High School some 30 years ago washed my full immersion baptism into the Baptist faith away. The second bottle I chugged that night resulted in a pasta “vision” that, sadly, I was too blind and covered in noodles to understand. Now, after a long career as a Biologist and educator, I see the light. If you form a curriculum committee, keep me in mind.
–Jeff Young, Ph.D.

I’m writing to add my support to your effort to get FSM acceptance in the Kansas science curriculum equal to that given to another religious belief, intelligent design. As a molecular biologist who was raised and attended public school in Kansas, I think I have a fairly good understanding of both evolutionary theory and creationist conjecture.

While I am still learning about FSM and am by no means an expert, my current assessment is that FSM is equally, if not more, scientifically valid as any presentation of ID I have seen to date. To allow Kansas science teachers to present one but not the other to their students is bald-faced religious discrimination, and should not be tolerated.

Of course, the whole situation makes me very sad for the students going through the state’s school system now; I fear that people like me, who got a good science education in a “Blue” state and went on to a career in science, will only become more rare, and the environment in such places will spin
into complete scientific illiteracy. I’m happy to support your quest to make as much of a difference in this as you can. Thanks again,
– Craig Behnke, Ph.D.

Continue to Academic Endorsements – page 4

50 Responses to “Academic Endorsements – page 3”

1 5 6 7
  1. carbonara says:

    I feel that is certainly among the list of lots substantial information in my situation. With this particular content understanding the article. Having said that should assertion in several normal things, The web page model is excellent, your posts is really good : Deb. Good work, best wishes

  2. michael hubbord says:

    I blog often and I seriusly thank you for your information. This great arrticle has truly peaked my
    interest. I will book mark your blog and keep checdking for new details about once a week.
    I opted in foor your Feed too.

1 5 6 7

Leave a Reply