Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KnifeMissile
I don't understand your contempt for the Flying Spaghetti Monster. shakran also found it insulting but I don't understand why other than, perhaps, that it exposes a fundamental flaw in religious reasoning but I don't see how that's something to get upset over. I mean, if I'm wrong about something, I'd sure as hell want someone to point it out to me. Leaving me in ignorance isn't going to help me, ever... However, I'm now really going too far on a conjecture. I'd ask what, specifically, is so wrong with the Flying Spaghetti Monster but, you know... |
*Takes a deep breath*
The only thing wrong with the
Flying Spaghetti Monster argument is that people like to adopt a "If-there's-no-scientific-evidence-of-it-then-it-must-not-exist" argument when, in actuality, their argument should be "If-there's-no-scientific-evidence-of-it-then-it-might-exist-outside-of-the-realm-of-science" (Seeing as how, you know, science is limited to the natural world, is based on, you know, induction and can only, you know, measure the known rather than the, you know, unknown).
But-- Hey!-- Science is what you make of it, right?
Edit: Does anyone realize how circular the
Flying Spaghetti Monster argument is? You'll say prove him, I'll say disprove him and we'll ultimately end up back at square one.