Academic Endorsements – page 1

As a scientist, I’d like to say that the currently accepted scientific theory is evolution. But, some competing ideas have been proposed, such as ID and FSMism, and discussion to include one should include the other, as these ideas are equally valid.
— Mark Zurbuchen, Ph.D.

As a medical practitioner and scientist, I wholeheartedly believe that every theory and hypothesis needs full consideration and explanation with formal ratification by peer review. We have a duty to inform our schools and presumably pasta should form a staple part of our educational diet.
— Dr. A. Macintyre (UK)

Letting the religious right teach ID in schools is like letting the Marines teach poetry in advanced combat training. As a scientist, I see these the relevancy between the two sets to be equal. If Kansas is going to mess up like this, the least it can do is not be hypocritical and allow equal time for other alternative “theories” like FSMism, which is by far the tastier choice.
— J. Simon, PhD

One of the hardest things to do as a scientist is to put my personal beliefs aside when discussing matters of science. So as a professional, I have to say that both forms of Intelligent Design – ID and ID-FSM are equally valid and if intelligent design is taught in schools, equal time should be given to the FSM theory and the non-FSM theory. But, speaking personally now, it seems to me the FSM theory is MUCH more plausable than the non-FSM ID theory, because it is the only one of the two that takes into account all the discrepancies between ID and measureable objective reality.
— Professor Douglas Shaw, Ph.D

In discussing competing theories, if one is to present ID then it is only fair and logical to teach other theories with commensurate evidence. Based on Mr. Henderson’s letter, it is clear that the FSM theory has evidence comparable in weight to ID. As a scientist and professor, it is often difficult to present differing opinions in an unbiased way. However, it is important to the student to be exposed to these ideas to form their own opinions. This comes right out of the handbook of the ID purporters: present the different “theories” and let the listener decide. If those in favor of ID are so convinced, then they should not be concerned that the presentation of the FSM theory would serve to undermine the credibility of ID.
— Elizabeth Garrett-Mayer, PhD

At one time, I believed as the Aztecs did, that the universe was created by two gods, Quetzalcoatl and Tezcatlipoca who attacked and ripped apart Hungry Woman to create the universe. Then I believed, as the Moriori do, that the universe was created when Papa and her husband Rangi hugged and bore children, and were subsequently separated by their son Tane who let light shine between them. However, my views have been swayed by the substantial evidence that the earth and universe was actually created relatively recently by the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM). I am firmly convinced that the evidence supporting this depiction of the origins of life, the universe, and everything has many of the trappings of science, and I therefore support the inclusion of FSM creation evidence in the Kansas science curriculum and standards.
— Sebastian Wren, Ph.D

One of the most exciting developments in fundamental physics in the last twenty years has been the development of so-called “String Theory.” In String Theory, all fundamental sub-atomic particles are visualized and described mathematically as microscopic vibrating strings. Although as yet unproven, many physicists believe that String Theory has the potential to become the long-sought “Theory of Everything,” through which the fundamental physical nature of all matter and forces will become understood.

Obviously String Theory IS correct, although misnamed (a secular humanist conspiracy perhaps?). As NOODLE Theory clearly unambiguously reveals, He has created the fundamental subatomic particles that form all matter in this universe in His own quivering image! You, me, the Earth, the stars…everything in the universe…are all built of trillions of tiny jiggling noodles, microscopic copies of our Divine Saucy Maker. Truly He is everywhere and in all things!
Boy-oh-Boyardi and Ramen!
–Steve Lawrence, PhD

As a scientist I believe that when presented with a new idea every possibility should be considered so we can eventually find the truth. It would be very biased if the only possibilities presented would be regulated by some authority. As a scientist I am biased towards the theory of evolution, but this does not mean that everyone should be forced to only learn this and believe this. Putting this aside, I feel if the government feels the need to regulate what students need to learn, then all ideas should be taught in school. Not only Intelligent Design (ID) should be taught, but the theory of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) should also be taught. In my scientific opinion when comparing the two theories, FSM theory seems to be more valid then the classic ID theory. There is more data to back FSM then I have ever seen for ID. The graph which was presented should alone more convincing then anything ID has ever presented. I endorse the FSM theory.
–Afshin Beheshti, PhD

As a scienctist, I think that ID is a form of pseudoscience–nothing more, nothing less. Pseudosciences lack the well-designed and carefully-interpreted experiments which characterize the true sciences. ID is popular because it provides the general public with an easily understood “answer” to nature’s complexity. Why is it human nature to try to fill the gaps in science with some form of a deity? Nobel laureate Richard Feynman, in his response the Challenger disaster, wrote, “For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled.” It is too bad that many in the USA have fallen into the ID trap, and are making emotional rather than logical decisions.

That being said, and the more I consider ID and the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) theory, the FSM theory has a lot going for it. First, it should satisfy even the most ardent ID detractors. Secondly, since everyone needs to eat and to believe in something, the FSM theory fulfills these desires. Finally, FSM neatly ties together the many ideas about the creation of the universe. I plan on exposing my students to the FSM theory over a pasta dinner.
–Elizabeth Cowles, PhD

Continue to Academic Endorsements – page 2

1,024 Responses to “Academic Endorsements – page 1”

  1. M.L.B. says:

    What about reaturing the evidence provided by the Raman Noodle Contest held last year. Who ever won that? I think it was Science Creative Quarterly or somthing that was sponsoring it. Rather than an endorsement we could have real science proof presented.

  2. Mozo says:

    What the heck?

  3. kalabalik says:

    The great thing with worshipping the FSM is that once you have worshipped FSM you can eat him. FSM will not let children starve to death, unlike other deities…

  4. Great logic says:

    The hate mail is what amazes me. I really like the irony that Jesus was crucified for his beliefs and this is exactly what the ‘pious’ contributors are practising in the hate-mail section. Do people really think that threatening copious amounts of retribution is why people join the flock? The diety or history you follow should make no difference- every single being should be valued by their actions, not their beliefs. FSM? Just as plausible as a ‘God’. Incidentally, without knowing anything about the FSM, how can the Christians evaluate the merits of pastafarian as a religion? They want us to know Jesus, but they won’t spend the time to get to know His spaghettiness. Well, I have a right to be stubborn too.

    And in a scenario that all Christians will be familiar with, I’d better grab out my credit card. I need to show my faith.

  5. Short Factor says:

    A friend of mine (who shall not be named) has had much difficulty deciding what faith to believe in. But when he found out about Pastafarianism, he said oh to hell with it and decided to make it his faith. This has not at all made me interested in Pastafarianism. I have too much fundamental knowledge of art, science, and religion to be sucked in to a faith as laughable as this. What his conversion has shown me is that people who are missing brain cells and can’t make decisions for themselves are the ones who choose Pastafarianism. Did I mention my friend smokes weed?

    On a side note, I do like the imagined stereotype of pirates (not in the bad way), but that won’t get me at all. Your evidence of his noodliness’ existence can easily be smashed in argument, and I’ll be happy to oblige.

  6. jimmy says:

    First of all i must say forgive me for any grammar errors i may make.I myself am on a path of spirituality, mainstream religion just doesn’t cut it for me.and although i havent read much on you’re sit yet i see that you do have good sense.i personally have nothing near a degree in anything at all other than the ability to think for myself. I truly dont understand how itelligent design theorist along with evolutionist cant get together and figure this out. to me, it would take both to make this universe run right. wouldnt intelligent design also include the ability to evolve and grow?. i think it must.without it, gene pools would become stagnant and life would end up in incest,tho it may take a few more thousand years,i see no way around it, therefore evolution has got to happen. or we will have to find some other way around it. i guess thats where racism comes into play,i’m not sure, but thats the only thing i see that can stop a stagnant gene pool here on this great planet we call earth.what is my take on the whole deal you may ask?. lets see, i truly think that advanced souls had more to do with it than anything else,i really dont think yaweh himself done it all,even scripture tells us there were more souls around at the time of creation,(angels and such). I personally think that these advanced souls started simple, not with a snap of a finger, but a very intelligent thought. i also think they started with the smallest of ellements in our oceans, we are made mostly of water, and what kind of water?, salt water.I also dont think he stopped with our little planet in such a huge universe,a supreme being would know that these creations come and go.our planet is an active one that is on its own path of self destruction. one day we will need a new one. an intelligent designer would take this into consideration and creat more worlds that can sustain life.why go through the trouble of creating such a vast universe if it isnt needed?.my views may be idiotic to some, maybe even most that hear them or that may even read them on this site if this gets posted that be it, they r my views and opinions.i’m sure i’ve been called worse by better.I must apologize if i have gotten off the beaten path, i’m sure i have.In a perfect world, we wouldnt have these discussions,although we all know this isnt a perfect world. again, please excuse the grammar, it’s not that i’m ignorant,i’m just not that prudish to be so correct….

  7. jimmy says:

    short factor, leave the weed out of it, ok.maybe you should lighten up and take a hit or 3 yourself.

  8. samplenajar says:

    the flying spaghetti monster created everything (weed included) in his perfect image. are we not to make full use of his wonderful creation?

Leave a Reply