Pharyngula

Clearly a parody

So Scott Adams shouldn’t be too irritated at this amusing depiction of his mental state.

Comments

  1. #1 Bachalon
    February 6, 2007

    Heh. I had to save it to view the whole thing, but I was able to.

    Also, I’ll be attending an “ID vs. Evolution” debate at the local community college and I wanted to completely tear the ID people up and down. Just hit them with questions they obviously won’t be able to answer.

    So far, I have these two:

    Since intelligent design does in fact support evolution, which do you think is more likely allopatric or sympatric speciation?

    Given that ID expresses a belief in intelligent agency during the evolutionary process, how does it account for things like harlequin type icthyosis (also known as harlequin fetus), autoimmune disorders, and a vitamin c pseudogene in humans and apes that is “broken” in the same location.

    I’d like 3 to 5, and that’s all I can think of.

    Thanks!

  2. #2 steve
    February 6, 2007

    this is about as funny as the low octane “dildobert” parodies that occasionally pop up on myspace kiddie sites (I have a 14 yo gdaughter). I fail to see how slagging a cartoonist that writes a three panel strip about moronicity in corporate amerika promotes science education.

    s.

  3. #3 Rey Fox
    February 6, 2007

    And I fail to see how your comment promotes world peace.

  4. #4 steve
    February 6, 2007

    it doesn’t mr. reynardine….I’m just suggesting that calling someone a dickhead because he holds religious beliefs is a good way to get a fuck you response from the putative dickhead (the generic method of discourse here), and general dismissal of the entire discussion from the majority who don’t care…

    s.

  5. #5 George Cauldron
    February 6, 2007

    I’m just suggesting that calling someone a dickhead because he holds religious beliefs is a good way to get a fuck you response from the putative dickhead

    Holds religious beliefs? Another Dilberthead here said Adams was an atheist. Can’t you guys make up your minds?

  6. #6 Bronze Dog
    February 6, 2007

    Steve, reread the comic. The point just sailed waaaaay over your head. This isn’t about religion at all.

  7. #7 llewelly
    February 6, 2007

    er.. well, it’s funnier than the Scott Adams’ article started the mess, but that’s a low bar to clear.

    Thank you for your efforts, BronzeDog, but I’m afraid it’s too stiff. Don’t give up parodying cartoonists, but don’t think you’re done with art when your work is only that good.

  8. #8 Bronze Dog
    February 6, 2007

    Yeah, I realize it’s not quite another Christians & Crusades (which is about religious nuttery), but figured I might as well, since it’s been almost a whole year since the first Image Dogtoring. May try another if I’m feeling more inspired.

  9. #9 Great White Wonder
    February 6, 2007

    ROTFLMFAO!!!!

    Scott Adams is a total doo-doo head!!!

  10. #10 steve
    February 6, 2007

    yo bronze, the point didn’t sail over my head. my point is this whole damn blog is, in essence, no religion vs. religion using a discussion model on the amoeba vs. carnivorous plant level. I could care less about adams. I just hope my gdaughter doesn’t decide that scientists are jerks an decide to become a pro skateboarder.

    s.

  11. #11 Rey Fox
    February 6, 2007

    You mean we weren’t playing dueling non sequiturs?

  12. #12 Great White Wonder
    February 6, 2007

    I just hope my gdaughter doesn’t decide that scientists are jerks an decide to become a pro skateboarder.

    Why? Pro skateboarders get paid more.

  13. #13 Bronze Dog
    February 6, 2007

    Gee, steve, I thought I was pointing out Adams’s use of circular logic, Humpty-Dumpty fallacy, and argument from lack of imagination. But you had to drag religion into it.

  14. #14 truth machine
    February 6, 2007

    I fail to see how slagging a cartoonist that writes a three panel strip about moronicity in corporate amerika promotes science education.

    This isn’t filed under science education, dipshit, so you’re attacking a strawman. and he’s not being slagged for writing about moronicity in corporate amerika, so the fact that he does so isn’t relevant.

    I’m just suggesting that calling someone a dickhead because he holds religious beliefs

    What the HELL are you talking about? Not only isn’t that what you suggested in your first post, but no one has done anything of the sort, dickhead.

  15. #15 donna
    February 6, 2007

    Scott Adams is a tool.

  16. #16 truth machine
    February 6, 2007

    yo bronze, the point didn’t sail over my head. my point is this whole damn blog is, in essence, no religion vs. religion using a discussion model on the amoeba vs. carnivorous plant level.

    There seem to be a lot of points that are your point. I thought it was something about how Adams shouldn’t be slagged because he writes about moronicity in corporate amerika. Oh, but now you say “I could care less about adams”.

    I just hope my gdaughter doesn’t decide that scientists are jerks an decide to become a pro skateboarder.

    You should be more concerned that your gdaughter decides that you’re a jerk, because you obviously are one.

  17. #17 George Cauldron
    February 7, 2007

    And I fail to see how your comment promotes world peace.

    Read more closely. He said he’s promoting whirled peas.

  18. #18 AJ Milne
    February 7, 2007

    He said he’s promoting whirled peas.

    The whorer… The whorer…

  19. #19 Fatmop
    February 7, 2007

    I thought the punchline was done quite well – in exactly the same style Adams uses. Thanks for the larf.

  20. #20 AustinAtheist
    February 7, 2007

    llewelly,

    Too stiff? You mean like the Dilbert cartoons themselves?

    :p

  21. #21 Azkyroth
    February 7, 2007

    I just hope my gdaughter doesn’t decide that scientists are jerks an decide to become a pro skateboarder.

    You should be more concerned that your gdaughter decides that you’re a jerk, because you obviously are one.

    My past experience with truth machine render this a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black. That said, the pot has a point.

  22. #22 llewelly
    February 7, 2007

    llewelly,
    Too stiff? You mean like the Dilbert cartoons themselves?

    Good point.

  23. #23 Stogoe
    February 7, 2007

    That’s just whore-able. Whore-able, I tells ya.

  24. #24 Blake Stacey
    February 7, 2007

    For all their sins, the Chick tracts have a much richer graphic style than Scott Adams’s work. That offers more material for the altered text to play against, so the text doesn’t have to work as hard, and it’s easier to make a perfect parody.

    It’s harder to hit perfection — but darn, this one was pretty good.

  25. #25 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    February 7, 2007

    my point is this whole damn blog is, in essence, no religion vs. religion using a discussion model on the amoeba vs. carnivorous plant level. I could care less about adams. I just hope my gdaughter doesn’t decide that scientists are jerks an decide to become a pro skateboarder.

    Is this parody? That might be one of the most insane groupings of words I’ve read in a few weeks.

  26. #26 matthew
    February 7, 2007

    Scott has replied in the comments section of The Bronze Blog…

  27. #27 Bronze Dog
    February 7, 2007

    He talks about the ‘subtlety’ of his position, so I asked for him to elaborate.

  28. #28 Torbjörn Larsson
    February 7, 2007

    Too stiff? You mean like the Dilbert cartoons themselves?

    Adams has confessed that he couldn’t draw when he started, IIRC. In any case he has managed to become a success in spite of that.

    Now it turns out he also doesn’t have a sense of humor in his private sphere. The man must be a genius.

  29. #29 Torbjörn Larsson
    February 7, 2007

    Too stiff? You mean like the Dilbert cartoons themselves?

    Adams has confessed that he couldn’t draw when he started, IIRC. In any case he has managed to become a success in spite of that.

    Now it turns out he also doesn’t have a sense of humor in his private sphere. The man must be a genius.

  30. #30 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    February 7, 2007

    Can I propose we start calling Scott Adams…… ScotAdams?

  31. #31 TheBlackCat
    February 7, 2007

    “Scott has replied in the comments section of The Bronze Blog…”

    Or at least someone claiming to be him.

The site is currently under maintenance and will be back shortly. New comments have been disabled during this time, please check back soon.