Most ridiculous websites

Genghis Khan said:
Intelligent Design has stiff competition.  Check out the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and be ready to laugh your ass off!  :lol:
Funny.  In mild defense of Intelligent Design, I am reading Hawking's A Briefer History of Time, and more than once he suggests that a god who formulated the physical laws of the universe -- which we haven't figured out yet, by the way -- is certainly plausible.  In fact, every time I read about general relativity and quantum mechanics, it makes me think (1) that these physicists are much smarter than me and (2) that nothing this complex could be a random accident. 
What's your definition of intelligent design? When I hear that term, I'm thinking about idiots like the ones in the Dicovery Institure.
I believe Hawking casually espouses a mild form of deism, that a creator constructed the rules of the universe and then fucked off, probably to go bang hot chicks or dudes (or both) in the Bahamas.
Why? You have natural processes driving the universe, what does a creator add to our understanding of anything? It's a superfleous (yes I butchered the spelling) concept.
Pascal's Wager is a pro-religion argument, mate.  Perhaps we're crossed, as I agree with you.
cornfedhick said:
(2) that nothing this complex could be a random accident. 

To this one can comment that the world is not necessarily that complex - it is the mathematical description which is complex.

Blaise Pascal said:
1. "God is, or He is not"
2. A game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up.
3. According to reason, you can defend neither of the propositions.
4. You must wager. It is not optional.

This makes sense seen from a point of view where the two only options are "be a Christian" or "be an atheist". When one is presented with more alternatives, Pascal's Wager becomes irrelevant. In the original context you could say that a non-believer faces death if there is no God, and eternal damnation otherwise - whereas the believer faces death or eternal happiness.

But if you for example add Islam to the mix, and say that either Christianity is right (and the only way to salvation is believing in Christ), Islam is right (the only way is following Muhammed's teachings) or neither is right (and there is no salvation/damnation) - then the argument falls to the ground.
Or if you assume that the varying flavours of Christianity all exclude those Christians who don't like their particular brand of kool-aid.
Of course. But it's less common now than say, a hundred years ago, that people of different Christian denominations think those of all other denominations are going straight to Hell when they die. Of course, some think so.
Well, back when Blaise Pascal was a going concern, the three major flavours of Christianity certainly believed that about each other.
Umm... I don't see what's ridiculous about that. It won't win any awards, but it's just an average blog. It's not really that bad, is it?