Mitochondrial Eve is proven to be wife of Adam

[Valjean]

But FSM is fictional, because:
1. It is absurd: spaghety can not fly, and pasta is dead.
Do you agree then, that FSM does not exist? Have I finally disproven the pastafarians?

One can find similar absurd wonders in religious literature from all over the world, including Christian literature.

 

[Valjean]

On what do you base that belief?

Hasn't been disproved.

 

[ecco]

Of course the Bible God might exist

On what do you base that belief?

Hasn't been disproved.

Please see post #61 about Psychic Snowflakes then tell me is you apply the same logic to Psychic Snowflakes.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, the Multi World interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is not fictional, but it is not real.
The fictional thing is a thing, which is announced by author to be non-existent. For example, if book is called "Fairytale", then the persons in the book are fictional.
If a monster is not announced as fiction, then it is not fictional.
But FSM is fictional, because:
1. It is absurd: spaghety can not fly, and pasta is dead.
Do you agree then, that FSM does not exist? Have I finally disproven the pastafarians?

Then by your standards all religions are "fictional" since they have the same sort of flaws that the FSM (Ramen) does.

And my spaghetti does fly at times, and after a week or two in the refrigerator it is certainly not "dead". Go on, eat some. I dare you.

 

[Milton Platt]

I announce New Zealand is fictional all the time. Does that mean it is actually fictional?

No, the Multi World interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is not fictional, but it is not real.
The fictional thing is a thing, which is announced by author to be non-existent. For example, if book is called "Fairytale", then the persons in the book are fictional.
If a monster is not announced as fiction, then it is not fictional.
But FSM is fictional, because:
1. It is absurd: spaghety can not fly, and pasta is dead.
Do you agree then, that FSM does not exist? Have I finally disproven the pastafarians?

You are making a fool of yourself. The FSM is a joke used to demonstrate that it is unreasonable to believe in something based on faith instead of evidence.
You are trying to disprove something that is a joke to those who use it in the first place.

 

[Milton Platt]

Prove it. Otherwise it is non-fictional, so the monster could exist. If even FSM could exist, then the God of the Bible also can.

Exactly. That is the point. The FSM and the Christian god have an equal chance of existing. So If you believe in the latter, you should believe in the former.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You are making a fool of yourself. The FSM is a joke used to demonstrate that it is unreasonable to believe in something based on faith instead of evidence.
You are trying to disprove something that is a joke to those who use it in the first place.

I must protest! The FSM (Ramen) is just as real as any other deity worshipped here.

May you be touched by His Noodly Appendages.

 

[Valjean]

Please see post #61 about Psychic Snowflakes then tell me is you apply the same logic to Psychic Snowflakes.

I don't see the problem.
However improbable, how can a thing be logically dismissed if it hasn't been disproved or isn't a contradiction?

That being said, I'd agree that it would be absurd, reasonably, to believe in either deity.

 

[Milton Platt]

I must protest! The FSM (Ramen) is just as real as any other deity worshipped here.

May you be touched by His Noodly Appendages.

Yes, I have recently come accross lots of unverifiable hearsay evidence that irrefutably demonstrates his existence.
Thank you for correcting my blasphemous assertions.

 

[ecco]

Please see post #61 about Psychic Snowflakes then tell me if you apply the same logic to Psychic Snowflakes.

I don't see the problem.
However improbable, how can a thing be logically dismissed if it hasn't been disproved or isn't a contradiction?

That being said, I'd agree that it would be absurd, reasonably, to believe in either deity.

You used the word "logically". Is it really logical to have to disprove the actual existence of every form of entity created by man's imaginings?

When it comes to deities, it is impossible to disprove them. There is no way to prove that the universe and everything in it, including memories, was not created Last Thursday. Should we therefore leave open the idea that everything was created Last Thursday? Would that be logical?

 

[Valjean]

You used the word "logically". Is it really logical to have to disprove the actual existence of every form of entity created by man's imaginings?

When it comes to deities, it is impossible to disprove them. There is no way to prove that the universe and everything in it, including memories, was not created Last Thursday. Should we therefore leave open the idea that everything was created Last Thursday? Would that be logical?

Believing everything that hasn't been disproven would obviously be absurd, but I'm not talking about that. I'm advocating believing in what you have good evidence for, ignoring what you have no evidence for, and keeping an open mind in case a unicorn wanders into your garden.