100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: flying spaghetti monster | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Actually, it is rather pathetic. One does not attack the individual beliefs and statements, but how people think and how they use language. On those grounds, those who mock, are only mocking themselves, for they employ the very same errors. No one with any real sense would say that one heap of non-sense is better than another, unless one were getting paid by the word. Now wouldn't it be a shame to realize that there is more substance behind religious sources, than a great many PHd thesis of the Universe? Actually the FSM is a direct comparison to modern monotheistic religions with just as much actual evidence to support the supernatural claims. In fact that it employs the same errors is intended, and is what actually takes it from a simple jest to a deep criticism of the kind of uncritical thinking that precludes blind faith. Substance? Really, if by substance you mean all of the goings on of very natural and normal beings making stuff up . . . well then Id agree with you, but something tells me that is not what you mean. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you Bushidobillyclub.
People who don't appreciate the FSM are usually people who have some of the same uncritical thinking that precludes blind faith. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, it is rather pathetic. One does not attack the individual beliefs and statements, but how people think and how they use language. This is exactly what the FSM is good for. When theists stray into nonsense (wrt to how they think and how they use language) without realizing it, applying their thought process to the FSM can bring that nonsense to light. Now wouldn't it be a shame to realize that there is more substance behind religious sources, ... Sure, of course not all theistic thought is non-sense. ...than a great many PHd thesis of the Universe?
I've browsed many phd thesis papers. You set the bar really low. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh dear...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In fact that it employs the same errors is intended, and is what actually takes it from a simple jest to a deep criticism of the kind of uncritical thinking that precludes blind faith. QFT |
|
|
|
|
