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.17 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. “Fitness” regards how well individuals “fit” in their environment.
2. Most scientists are perverted and use Latinate terms to hide this fact. Translated into English, staphylococci means “Power Penis.”
3. No relation to Sir Elton John.
4. Meaning “many tiny penises.”
5. See various stories by Jack London.
6. I find it suspicious that biology textbooks rarely mention this fact.
7. Wisdom teeth appear to still serve a useful function in parts of the Deep South.
8. See Robert Louis Stevenson’s Treasure Island.
9. Women are not advised to try this in the company of perverted men.
10. Nihilos were an early Roman snack food, an early predecessor to Doritos. Essentially, this term translates to “from Doritos.”
11. Bonk.
12. Rams, deer, elk, etc.
13. Also, George W. Bush bears a striking resemblance to a chimpanzee.
14. Henderson, 2005.
15. Luke 19:27.
16. Who managed to knock off Jesus, if you believe some people.
17. Which would be cool, but would probably also make you a little uncomfortable around other people.
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,1 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.2 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
