Scientific knowledge versus spiritual knowledge

[God of Mr. Hanky]

MysticKnight

We are using Creator as place holder to understand the nature of morality. This creator can be the flying pasta monster like Atheists always talk about. It doesn't assume it exists in reality or that even if it's rationally possible. It's putting as a place holder in the argument, to show morality always existed.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster is very real, and His Noodly Appendage can reach across 1 million universes to zap down and boil the unbeliever!  

Actually, its purpose is to satirize the utter silliness in people believing the myths of Yahweh, Hindu gods, Jesus, or Allah, or any one of thousands which so many very mortal and very unenlighted people have created in their own images. You choose not to believe you're being silly, but that doesn't change the facts.

FSM also exists to publicly lampoon all the special pleading of religious believers, and their activism has pointed out the problem of allowing religious exemptions to circumvent the purpose of public safety measures,  such as the license photo.

I know who the FSM is.  There is also Carl Sagan's invisible dragon, and my microscopic leprechaun.  My question to you that you are not understanding is why do you feel we need a "placeholder" to understand the nature of morality?  I am telling you that if you do an iota of Internet research you will find that science can explain human morality, and how it is advantageous to our survival as a species.  The fact that you refuse to do any research tells me you are dead set in your world view, and "refuse to budge."

I think I failed to put the right quote in its own bubble, not sure if I got confused where I pressed the "Reply" button. Edited to show the reply with FSM joke was directed at MysticKnight's god-centric assessment of FSM.