скачать книгу бесплатно
Fact: Pirates, our ancestors, lived in the tropics and ate a lot of fruit.
Evolution Gets Sexy
Finally, I will address “sexual selection,” which I promised some time earlier. The basic concept behind sexual selection is that one gender of the species, usually the female, actively chooses members of the opposite sex to copulate with,
(#ulink_599c33c5-cb6d-505e-9e40-66e73159474b) based on certain criteria, thus placing a selective pressure on the species as a whole. Sexual selection explains the bright foliage of male birds, the impressive ritualistic duels among male rams, deer, elk, and other ungulates,
(#ulink_ea4fd4e1-9512-592a-bb89-9a1d07ad10c0) and the high percentage of Hummers being driven by short, ugly men. In short, sexual selection depends on the success of certain individuals over others of the same sex, while Natural Selection is non-gender specific. In the interest of modernity, I move that Congress pass a bill outlawing this backward and sexist practice.
The Spaghedeity
While I have essentially decimated the theory of Evolution throughout these pages, it is important to state that a great deal of credible Evolutionary evidence does exist. No one can dispute the fossil record, which shows a clear and gradual transformation of species over time (albeit with frustrating gaps—and I ask you, Who could have put them there?). And there do indeed appear to be selective forces at work in the world, for instance when drunks walk out onto the road and are hit by cars.
(#ulink_8f824b97-21d7-5fd8-9084-13fc742c67e7)
We are not saying that Evolution can’t exist, only that it is guided by His Noodly Appendage. And our Spaghedeity is extremely modest. For some reason, He went through a great deal of trouble to make us believe that Evolution is true—masking the prominent role of Pirates in our origins, making monkeys seem more important than they really are, generally keeping behind the scenes and out of the spotlight.
In spite of His low profile, though, let no one doubt that the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is not only a groundbreaking religion, but is also supported by hard science, making it probably the most unquestionably true theory ever put forth in the history of mankind. To make my point, I will turn to the modern-day problem of global warming.
Pirates, as you know, are His Chosen People. Yet their numbers have been shrinking ever since the 1800s. Consequently, we find that global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are a direct result of the shrinking number of Pirates. To illustrate this fact, I have included the well-known graph from a recent study (below).
As you can see, there is a statistically significant inverse relationship between Pirates and global temperature. But of course not all correlations are causal. For example, take a look at this seeming correlation regarding ID proponents:
It would appear that the people behind ID have a lower intelligence quotient than the general population—and a significantly lower IQ than scientists, who overwhelmingly reject the idea of Intelligent Design.
(#ulink_c5bb5de4-5a72-5aa6-ac56-6415b7193975)
GLOBAL AVERAGE TEMPERATURE vs. NUMBER OF PIRATES
I, for one, tend to believe this to be merely a strange coincidence, and that ID believers are not necessarily as retarded as the data would suggest. It is entirely likely that the Flying Spaghetti Monster put this coincidence in place in order to confuse us further as to our true origins. We may never know.
FSM vs. Other Religions
A conversation about Intelligent Design proponents, no matter how brief and specious, inevitably leads us to a discussion about God and religion. It is important to state up front that the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is a peaceful religion—probably the most peaceful of them all. But can we prove that? In order to explore our proposition, let us look at religion and violence throughout history, particularly with regard to war and death.
SCATTER PLOT FOR BELIEF IN ID
Christianity appears to be the Rambo of religions, with the Crusades, the Inquisition, various bloody rebellions, the Conquistadors … the list seems nearly endless. Suffice it to say that when Jesus Christ stated, in his bewitching and Yoda-like manner, “But those enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me,”
(#ulink_46aee4f9-3295-50ff-848e-82e1c0185ade) people took him pretty literally. The Jews
(#ulink_112fbe07-61a2-577d-9742-95fc5a421e6a) and the Muslims haven’t done so well for themselves either, and are still duking it out. We even find Buddhists fighting in China. So, glossing over the evidence, we find that religion can be quite scary and violent. On the other hand, there’s absolutely no evidence of any deaths from FSMism, which seems to imply that it has the lowest death rate. And if that is true, then this is strong evidence that FSMism is the most peaceful religion.
Now take a look at how much criticism of Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and the other religions there is. People can’t seem to decide on the simple things, like which holy book to follow, let alone whether any of it is true. There are arguments between friends and countries, tens of thousands of books on the various religions, all poking holes, jibbering about which god to worship (Hinduism), jabbering about which ancient prophet’s cousin to support (Islam). It’s a mess. And yet we find that exactly, count them, zero books have been written to poke holes in the theory of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. There isn’t even any academic criticism, only academic support—and academics love to argue about everything. All this we take as evidence that FSMism is probably true.
Finally, we find that the religions tend to put a lot of stock in “dogma,” which is a way of saying they are correct beyond all doubt. Even the most devout of the Pastafarians will scratch their heads and nervously readjust their eye patches at this idea. Dogma implies an absolute belief in something, and in order for people to have an absolute belief in anything, they’d basically have to be omniscient.
(#ulink_e8c5b1bf-687e-5e8f-be12-bfacf5be7871) We have a different approach: FSM believers reject dogma. Which is not to say that we don’t believe we’re right. Obviously, we do. We simply reserve the right to change our beliefs based on new evidence or greater understanding of old evidence. Our rejection of dogma is so strong that we leave open the possibility that there is no Flying Spaghetti Monster at all. So, in a sense, you could say that we’re extremely open-minded—we could change our minds someday. All we ask is proof of His nonexistence.
The fossil record is loaded with evidence of His existence. You just have to know where to look.
1. (#ulink_855906fa-5dd0-59a4-a4d3-f2c4cf40a696) “Fitness” regards how well individuals “fit” in their environment.
2. (#ulink_88e56833-5431-569c-8bd7-6c60219e48b8) Most scientists are perverted and use Latinate terms to hide this fact. Translated into English, staphylococci means “Power Penis.”
3. (#ulink_88e56833-5431-569c-8bd7-6c60219e48b8) No relation to Sir Elton John.
4. (#ulink_88e56833-5431-569c-8bd7-6c60219e48b8) Meaning “many tiny penises.”
5. (#ulink_3dd9d72b-ea79-5fa0-b02a-261eb23a731d) See various stories by Jack London.
6. (#ulink_1f6d4f71-5b81-51ce-b66c-35f14e24fb6b) I find it suspicious that biology textbooks rarely mention this fact.
7. (#ulink_c68b7946-df5e-59fd-b157-08de456a4892) Wisdom teeth appear to still serve a useful function in parts of the Deep South.
8. (#ulink_92d31c24-f601-5df7-a7cf-8347a1d303f3) See Robert Louis Stevenson’s Treasure Island.
9. (#ulink_7afa2b9e-4702-5cd4-adba-d953f556d440) Women are not advised to try this in the company of perverted men.
10. (#ulink_740d95b5-c742-5332-8b5c-31617d902a2b) Nihilos were an early Roman snack food, an early predecessor to Doritos. Essentially, this term translates to “from Doritos.”
11. (#ulink_d6718a86-a745-5d5a-a3a5-7006cfcc5740) Bonk.
12. (#ulink_d6718a86-a745-5d5a-a3a5-7006cfcc5740) Rams, deer, elk, etc.
13. (#ulink_712ab3b6-868e-5a1b-b414-944f8b6ab3d4) Also, George W. Bush bears a striking resemblance to a chimpanzee.
14. (#ulink_90956ecf-8025-58a3-b701-2f238c42af2f) Henderson, 2005.
15. (#ulink_61feb935-6a29-59e9-9ed9-61058fddcba8) Luke 19:27.
16. (#ulink_61feb935-6a29-59e9-9ed9-61058fddcba8) Who managed to knock off Jesus, if you believe some people.
17. (#ulink_79982d6f-96aa-54a9-b2d1-bdd43733d25e) Which would be cool, but would probably also make you a little uncomfortable around other people.
An Alternate Vision (#ulink_8cd09f45-1ac3-55df-908b-7f92cf09d7cb)
A Note from
Peter J. Snodgrass, Ph.D.,
and the Imam Perez Jaffari
RE: UD in a
Not-So-Intelligent World
When confronted with the grim realities of war, famine, pestilence, diarrhea, and Celine Dion, it is not entirely surprising that one might be led to consider that our Creator, while all-powerful, might not have proven Himself to be completely infallible.
While there can be no doubt that the source of creation was indeed the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM), and that He did leave mysterious and ambiguous clues to throw us off track,
(#ulink_19c7be9b-88f7-5155-9685-9af742c7fa43) we submit that the FSM was careless, cruel, drunk, or even high when he first laid down the template for life as we know it. How else to explain the extinction of 99.9 percent of all plant and animal species ever to exist on earth? How else to explain the release of not one, but two Deuce Bigalow films?
Without question, we are members of a small and limited minority of scientists and religious leaders who deign to question the Creator’s wisdom in allowing for life-threatening volcanoes, tsunamis, hurricanes, twisters, and plastic surgery gone bad, but as the evidence accumulates, we can only posit one undeniable theory:
The FSM, our Creator, isn’t very bright.
Undoubtedly, this statement represents a subtle paradigm shift, especially when juxtaposed against the common perception of a benevolent, all-knowing Creator, but innumerable examples of questionable judgment do exist. Something is certainly rotten in Denmark when Ben Affleck is allowed to bed both J. Lo and that hottie from Alias, while Matt Damon is forced to date his own assistant. We cry foul!
So we hereby state our belief that the universe is a result of “UNINTELLIGENT DESIGN” (UD).
Casting social science aside, we can turn to the physical sciences to support our claims.
(#ulink_7b68e049-564b-550b-8c49-263845952cdb) Why doesn’t the Benevolent and Noodly Master get to work and start eradicating mass poverty, cancer, global warming, and nuclear proliferation? Is He too busy trying to rekindle the low-carb diet craze?
While this treatise might not appear to meet the normal requirements of an academic paper, let it be said that such was not even our intention. This is a work composed by a scientist and a religious leader. If science and religion are to live side by side in mutual nonjudgment, there needs to be a new model for dialogue, one that takes into account the interests of both sides. Religious people don’t really “do” numbers. Scientists can’t get dates and don’t have a clue what real people think. By collecting and presenting a different kind of data, we aim to appeal to “Bible thumpers” and “brainiacs” alike. Just getting those epithets out on the table can make a difference.
In fact, we feel better already. Too many resources are being wasted in trying to prove intelligence in all we see around us. Wouldn’t it be better just to throw in the towel, call a spade a spade, and admit that our Creator is a dumbass?
Examples of Unintelligent Design
1. THE DODO. Portuguese sailors, who marveled at this bird’s trusting and docile nature, gave it the name dodo, meaning “simpleton.” Unfortunately, the dodo was unable to compete in a rapidly changing environment,
(#ulink_40913170-2ae1-5e7d-92b0-ad034686c4de) and the bird soon went the way of the Portuguese sailor.
2. THE PASSENGER PIGEON. Once the most populous bird in North America, the passenger pigeon’s demise can be traced back to the early 1900s and McDonald’s highly popular but short-lived “McPidgin Sandwich.”
3. THE IRISH ELK. Neither exclusively Irish nor an elk (it was really a large deer), the male of this species attracted mates based on the size of its antlers: the larger the antlers, the more attractive the male. As the selective pressures for a “nice rack” increased, the head of the male grew so overburdened that the males began to fall easy prey to the large predators
(#ulink_e8f24e16-8583-5917-b616-630172f37b07) that were moving into northern Europe at the time. All the less impressive males just drank themselves to death.
4. THE LLAMA. The typical llama is unable to produce milk or eggs, and many people can’t even spell its name.
5. THE APPENDIX. Might once have had value but is now completely useless.
(#ulink_b7f0110d-4d94-5288-b56f-023787d1e8d1) No one really knows why it remains, although some have been found to hold gold coins.
6. RELIGIOUS WARFARE. Someone has described religious warfare as “killing people over who has the best invisible friend.” We tend to agree.
7. DISCO. Scientists are still split on this dance craze, but the FSM doesn’t like it, so it goes on the list.
8. THE MACARENA. True fact: invented by a guy named Retardo.
9. JAR JAR BINKS. Hesa just stupid.
10. THE DUCK-BILLED PLATYPUS. Q. What creator combines a duck with a muskrat? A. Not an intelligent one.
Aboriginal children killed the dodo.
1. (#ulink_6ee5ec79-5c7f-5c41-bae0-31465c7d48a3) For instance, making Evolution seem plausible.
2. (#ulink_e610a4a0-f026-53d6-b344-34de1b14ad1f) The Patel Paradox: Dr. S. Patel, Ph.D., notes that the Hubble constant reveals a universe that is expanding at a rate both measurable and significant. In spite of that fact, he still can’t find a parking space.
3. (#ulink_628359ef-e439-592d-a6e8-053bf5508169) Possibly caused by an early aboriginal dot.com boom.
4. (#ulink_e2dd45d9-8e77-5c0a-9e4c-c513a038a87f) Sabre-toothed tigers, Germans, etc.
5. (#ulink_aed0bda8-a7de-584a-a494-0b77412c54ca) This includes its presence in book form.
FSM vs. ID, an Unlikely Alliance (#ulink_3e05106c-81c3-5b8e-9e77-2345588d3efe)
The Controversy: Peer Review
PEOPLE ARE PLAYING POLITICS with science.
Supporters of Intelligent Design, or ID, have been targeting education officials and public policy makers in a blatant attempt to have their views taught to our nation’s students as “science.” Because 99 percent of the scientific community supports the theory of Evolution, ostensibly rejecting ID in the process, we find ID proponents arguing that their beliefs should be taken directly to the public—thus letting disorientated high school biology students decide the issue once and for all.
(#litres_trial_promo)
This contrasts significantly with conventional scientific methods, where researchers are required to submit their work for review by fellow scientists in their particular field—a process known as “peer review.” Such a system serves to weed out unacceptable theories, thus keeping science pure and permanently safe from controversy. But ask yourself this question: While “peer review” sounds like a good idea, is turning to one’s peers for their opinions not the wrong way to go? Is it not the same as a woman asking her boyfriend, “Do I look fat in this blouse/dress/parka?” Regardless of the item of clothing being worn, the answer is a resounding “no, you look great” in 99.99 percent of all test cases.
(#litres_trial_promo) As a consequence, we argue that the highly secretive “peer review” system is unfairly hardwired to reinforce the limited viewpoints of scientists and their close friends.
(#litres_trial_promo)
NATIONWIDE POLL OF A CROSS SECTION OF “AVERAGE” HIGH SCHOOL BIOLOGY STUDENTS
What is your opinion of Evolution?
If the scientists had their way, we wouldn’t be discussing ID at all today. In fact, you’d have to go all the way back to the Salem witch trials before you’d find such close-mindedness and raw hatred for other people’s views.
(#litres_trial_promo) But brave school board members—nearly all of whom have no scientific background and, in some cases, very little education—have declared the current system to be unfair. With the courage of witches, they have dared to step forward and redefine science, and we of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster have decided to stand by them.
And so we throw our hats into the ring:
We have uncovered remarkable evidence suggesting that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is behind the theory of Intelligent Design, deftly manipulating the debate with His Noodly Appendage.
If Not Him, Then Who?
If we take the Intelligent Design proponents at their word—that ID is not religious in nature but simply a scientific alternative to Evolution—then the religious background of the proponents of ID should closely mirror that of the general public. However, when we look at the data, we do not see the expected result. Instead, we find that 95 percent of leading ID proponents are evangelical Christians, or ECs. Given that evangelical Christians do not even attain such high densities in the South, we estimate that there is a .001 percent chance of this nearly 1:1 ratio of IDs to ECs occurring naturally. Again, accepting the claim that ID is a science and not a religion, the only other inference we can draw is a supernatural one.
ID proponents are extremely careful to state their arguments in secular language, avoiding calls by many to declare the identity of the designer. When one looks at ID it is clear that a creator must be present; however, the ID proponents are tight-lipped as to who that creator might be. If it’s a Christian God, why not mention it? You’d think this would be important enough to at least be stated somewhere. This leads us to determine that the designer is not a Christian God. But if that’s the case, then who is behind the controversy?
Clearly, the FSM is behind it. Who else could influence such a uniformly religious group of people to subscribe to the non-Christian, nonreligious theory of ID? The FSM is notorious for just this type of mischievous intervention, and thus it can only be concluded that the FSM is behind the ID movement, which makes sense when you think about it.
Irrefutable Proof
Some of the greatest thinkers of all time have dedicated their lives to proving the existence of God. Thomas Aquinas gave it his best shot, and his writings have been confusing college freshmen ever since. Kurt Gödel used a proof that appears to have employed hieroglyphics; unfortunately, no one can read hieroglyphics anymore, so we don’t know if he was successful. Suffice it to say, no one has managed to prove the existence of God, and as a result, ID doesn’t seem to be provable either.
