There is a lot of urgent chatter in the media about Intelligent Design. (I will try not to call it a debate, for reasons already pointed out here, among myriad other places.) Well, if you have not been following the discussion at several places on the blogosphere (such as here and here), concerning the role of the latest Deity, the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM), there is a nice New York Times article by Sarah Boxer, (better late than never), summarizing it today*. Have a read, it’s worth it - and important. Here’s one of the key points Bobby Henderson (to whom the FSM allegedly revealed its nature, and who I note is a physicist) made in a letter to the Kansas State Board of Education, as related in the article:
… he wrote that although he agreed that science students should “hear multiple viewpoints” of how the universe came to be, he was worried that they would be hearing only one theory of intelligent design. After all, he noted, there are many such theories, including his own fervent belief that “the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster.” He demanded equal time in the classroom and threatened a lawsuit.
and further….
Lawyers contacted him inquiring how serious he was about a lawsuit against the Kansas board. His answer: “Very.”
There’s more about the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster here, a Wikipedia entry here, and don’t forget to claim your $1 million prize, offered by Xeni at Boing Boing, if you do stumble on empirical evidence that proves that Jesus is not the son of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
-cvj
(*Thanks for the heads-up, Nick!)
August 29th, 2005 at 1:59 pm
I love the Flying Spaghetti Monster. It puts the whole intelligent design movement in a ridiculous light. Something that really needs doing.
August 29th, 2005 at 2:02 pm
Ramen to that!
-cvj
August 29th, 2005 at 2:07 pm
The mechanical properties of spaghetti presumably place a limit on the achievable size and airspeed of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. At the least, direct observation would allow for an estimation of the breaking stress of faith.
August 29th, 2005 at 2:13 pm
Fantastic title!
August 29th, 2005 at 2:15 pm
Adam,
Doesn’t this also depend upon whether it is cooked to the recommended “al dente” consistency? Which raises the interesting question of whether any previous Deity has ever had a test of faith in it based upon the challenge: “Bite Me!”.
-cvj
August 29th, 2005 at 2:16 pm
Mark. Yes, it is isn’t it? That is one of the things that caught my eye, for various cultural reasons.
-cvj
August 29th, 2005 at 2:25 pm
Finally, religion and science might be united, as described here:
http://yolanda3.dynalias.org/wbpage/MH/mh.html#20050828
August 29th, 2005 at 2:38 pm
Watch out, His noodliness even appears in the HDF South:
BEHOLD
August 29th, 2005 at 2:40 pm
Yes, Clifford, I was thinking that myself. Overcooking would surely result in the Flying Gloop Monster. Undercooking and brittle failure will bring a quick and inglorious end to the vibrant cult of Pastafarianism (to paraphrase Nietzsche, perhaps: ‘The Flying Spaghetti Monster is dead, but we may still for millenia be picking bits of Him off the ground’).
Timing is the key*.
*And salt the water, making sure you use a large enough pot.
August 29th, 2005 at 2:58 pm
What a great post!
I guess String theory really is the Theory of Everything. (insert big smily face here).
August 29th, 2005 at 3:43 pm
As far as I know, ID does not invoke any specific deity, so the motivation for this parody (and lawsuit) seems misplaced.
Zero
August 29th, 2005 at 3:49 pm
His point is that they will only hear one theory of ‘intelligent design’. By producing a ridiculous one founded on an explicit invented deity, he both lampoons the absurdity of ID whilst also alluding to the ill-hidden motivation of at least the majority of the ID supporters (which is clearly that God has been at work on the Design side).
August 29th, 2005 at 3:58 pm
I should add that I meant to say that he is lampooning the ‘competing theories’ argument whilst he also lampoons ID itself.
August 29th, 2005 at 4:00 pm
So the old proverb comes home to the IDers:
Be careful what you wish for.
Fighting with the Flying Spaghetti Monster is going to gobble up much political and economic capital, like the Ten Commandments in the Courthouse has throughout the bible belt.
Good move!
August 29th, 2005 at 4:24 pm
Zero,
this seems to be the main difference between Creationism and ID.
But I refuse to play by their rules. If there is an Intelligent Designer then tell what who it is; Until then I assume it is the FSM.
August 29th, 2005 at 4:27 pm
Sorry, I screwed up my last post:
If there is an Intelligent Designer then tell us who or what it is;
Until then I assume it is the FSM.
PS: Of course the ID proponents would like to duck this question to
avoid “favoring one religion over another” and thus prevent it be
taught in schools; All the time assuming that Christians would know
how they mean it …
August 29th, 2005 at 7:41 pm
Zero said:
As far as I know, ID does not invoke any specific deity, so the motivation for this parody (and lawsuit) seems misplaced.
Yes, Zero, I’m sure those good folks in Kansas are *completely agnostic* about the identity of the Designer, and those who are not would never let their private faith in Voodooism influence their actions. Right?
August 29th, 2005 at 7:49 pm
That’s right, Jill. And if someone wants to point out that the banner on the Intelligent Design blog features a prominent symbol of Christianity, it must be some sort of crazy coincidence.
August 29th, 2005 at 7:53 pm
Not coincidence…. some sort of intelligent design… perhaps?
-cvj
August 29th, 2005 at 8:29 pm
Ah, His Noodlyness has arrived in Cosmicvariance.com!
I appreciate the humour and is gratified that it is receiving a lot of press recently. What I really wish though, is the emergence of a prominent someone from the scientific community which can command the attention of the media in such a way that politicians will find it impossible to ignore him/her. And that this someone will lead a counter PR offensive that will not only bury the whole ID silliness for good, but use this sudden media spotlight on scientists and crackpots to educate the public on what science really is (and isn’t).
I guess I wish for old Huxley to come back from the grave.
August 29th, 2005 at 8:34 pm
On the subject, the NY Tiimes also published an oped demolishing ID by the philosopher Daniel Dennett, available also at www.edge.org at
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/dennett05/dennett05_index.html
and by the way, we better get ready, because astronomy and cosmology are next, see:
http://www.nwcreation.net/cosmology.html
and
http://www.2think.org/berlinski.shtml
and no, these are not jokes.
August 29th, 2005 at 9:00 pm
Lee: Those last two links are scary !
-cvj
August 29th, 2005 at 9:13 pm
Yes Lee, you’re right. They’ve been gearing up for this one for a while.
August 29th, 2005 at 9:43 pm
I’m puzzled- why is steady state better for religious ideas than the big bang? the initial singulairty seems like as good a place as any to insert god.
August 29th, 2005 at 9:46 pm
Rumour has it that the Big Bang all happened a rather long time ago. More than 6 days before we were Created, even.
Big Bang is more your Creation moment for less literal christians than we’re discussing here.
August 29th, 2005 at 9:50 pm
I see, but for that they’ll have to refute a lot of science, starting with geophysics…
August 29th, 2005 at 9:54 pm
Fossils are there to test our faith. Just so’s you know.
I’d advise that you read a copy of Watchtower sometime, but that’s a mean trick to play on anyone.
August 29th, 2005 at 9:56 pm
In my youth I was exposed to the idea that the initial six days were just very long days…those were peaceful times.
August 30th, 2005 at 2:08 am
Tony Smith and John Fudjack are two people who handle both spirituality and physics well unlike Creationism and ID.
Here’s a little from Smith (whose physics model is similar to Lee Smolin’s bosonic string-like M-theory):
http://www.valdostamuseum.org/hamsmith/ArchMandMus.html
Here’s John Fudjack interviewing Brian Greene:
http://tap3x.net/EMBTI/j6greene.html
My website, which coincidently uses the 6 days of creation as a metaphor, has more links to Smith and Fudjack (and my two papers in Fudjack’s journal).
Thanks, John
August 30th, 2005 at 11:24 am
I missed this editorial from my local paper this past Saturday and became aware of it only because today, the paper felt obliged to print four responses from ID adherents:
http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=91257&ran=98338
It is not necessary to print the responses here because they parrot the strict ID line about science’s supposed inability to prove its theories. What these people seem to miss is that while scientific theories have accurately predicted certain facts later discovered, science accepts that it does not currently have all of the answers to the beginnings of the universe and life. ID, on the other hand, presupposes its most important fact, the nature of origin.
August 30th, 2005 at 11:29 am
Yes. One is science, the other is not.
-cvj
August 30th, 2005 at 1:43 pm
Sean’s alma mater will be hosting a pro-evolution lecture next month. No debate, just an explaination of how it works.
PS his alma mater is Villanova, which has a darn good astronomy department.
August 30th, 2005 at 7:28 pm
I could not help being struck by this line from
http://www.nwcreation.net/cosmology.html
namely
“challenging the hypotheticals” [of the Big Bang theory]. Am I alone in being reminded of … W ?
You know, Mark’s W, ratio of pressure to density, ahem…good name for a blog by the way….
September 9th, 2005 at 5:37 pm
you to can help convert more people to the pastafarians by clicking on this link
http://www.gophergas.com/funstuff/flyingspaghettimonster.htm
September 9th, 2005 at 7:22 pm
Thanks Rob! Cheered up my wait for the bus! (Don’t you just love woreless?)
September 9th, 2005 at 7:23 pm
…wireless…obviously…sorry…
September 9th, 2005 at 8:44 pm
Good Lord…wireless at busstops…whatever will they think of next?!
-cvj
February 10th, 2006 at 9:00 am
beautiful. according to the bible (which we all know is absolutely 100% every word correct)jesus is the son of god, god created man in his own image, which, by theory of evolution, who knows what the hell that was. it is entirely possible for our beloved flying spaghetti monter to have birthed our saviour!t makes as much sense as anything else in the all-knowing bible.