Now on ScienceBlogs: The death of Tetrapod Zoology
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
…and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• Atheist Nexus
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
• Quick link to the latest endless thread
Education and religion are two things not regulated by supply and demand. The less of either the people have, the less they want.
[Charlotte Observer, 1897]
« They shoot the dogs? | Main | What's your SQ? »
Category: Weirdness
Posted on: February 20, 2007 8:07 PM, by PZ Myers
The great unanswered question: How many condoms can you put on a penis at once? These people make a gallant effort to discover the answer, but are stymied when they run out of condoms…after slipping 625 of them on.
Then, unfortunately, there's the step where they use a hacksaw to remove them…
(via ZayZayEm)
Share this: Facebook Twitter Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/33823
Comments
Posted by: Bronze Dog | February 20, 2007 8:11 PM
What the frell just happened to this blog?
Posted by: George | February 20, 2007 8:13 PM
Here's hoping that book gets finished soon!
Posted by: BlueIndependent | February 20, 2007 8:24 PM
PZ, surely you jest...and not even a "work-safe" warning (granted the content is well explained beforehand).
You were on topic all day, and now this? Did you get a Starbucks Caramel latte at 4:30 in the afternoon? Freudian Slips are quite common these days, but I do believe you've invented the Freudian Blog Post.
Posted by: John McKay | February 20, 2007 8:31 PM
Do not attempt this experiment with an actual penis -- severe injury may result.
You know that some drunken frat boys somewhere are going to decide that this sounds like a challenge and a great idea for a contest. Faced with that possibility, I think we all have a responsibility to see that this article gets the widest possible circulation. Do it for Darwin.
Posted by: Paguroidea | February 20, 2007 8:55 PM
Quite the science project! I would never have guessed that was possible.
Posted by: Dustin | February 20, 2007 9:14 PM
Zing! Heh, reminds me of the Darwin Award from a few years ago. The one where some guy decided that the ball cleaners at the batting range might be good for something else...
Posted by: Zeno | February 20, 2007 10:13 PM
"Don't try this at home"? Where the heck else would you try it? Huh?
Posted by: Sastra | February 20, 2007 10:15 PM
Frankly, I am much more impressed with one of their other experiments, "How To Nail Jello To a Wall." With sufficient replication and fine-tuning, their findings might provide valuable information in dealing with liberal theology.
Posted by: Greg Laden | February 20, 2007 11:45 PM
This site has a lot of great ideas for science fair projects.
Posted by: Paguroidea | February 20, 2007 11:54 PM
I wonder what teachers would say about a condom experiment for the annual science fair, especially in schools where the word, "condom", isn't used because only abstinence education is taught.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall if a kid in my local school district proposed a science projects using condoms.
Posted by: beepbeepitsme | February 21, 2007 1:06 AM
In order to make it more interestimg, he should have conducted the experiment in 2 parts. 1. See how many condoms you can fit on a circumcised penis and 2. See how many condoms you can fit on an uncircumcised penis.
May the strongest penis win.
Posted by: James | February 21, 2007 2:55 AM
I'm actually a little disappointed that this was merely an experiment, and made use of apparatus rather than flesh+blood.
So.... where are the newspaper articles about the drunken fratboys trying this for real? Come on, don't keep me waiting!
Posted by: kmiers | February 21, 2007 7:45 AM
"With its pointed top laid open, the pale and rubbery latex-encased dildo was beginning to resemble a giant squid being filleted."
This is the true reason PZ found this so captivating!
Posted by: Fernando Magyar | February 21, 2007 7:50 AM
Is it still ok to use the word squid in children's books?
Posted by: David Livesay | February 21, 2007 8:16 AM
Me too. I'm further disappointed that they didn't actually try them out. I'd like to know if it's comparable to taking a shower with 625 raincoats on.
Posted by: Kagehi | February 21, 2007 2:01 PM
Hmm. That would be the theology where you admit you don't know everything, as apposed to the one where you know nothing, but quote passages out of a dusty old book so you can *claim* that someone told you something right? Yeah, its a whole hell of a lot harder to nail rational thought to walls, boards, crosses... than shit that never changes, never learns, never improves and is actually proud of those attributes.
Posted by: Sastra | February 21, 2007 3:14 PM
Kagehi:
Ah, no, not at all. The "liberal theology" referred to here would instead be one where you are very careful that any claim you make is too vague, metaphorical, symbolic, analogical, numinous, indistinct, elevated, obscure, abstruse, cryptic, general, non-specific, and/or abstract to be criticized for content.
Example: "What is God?"
Answer: "Well, let me tell you what God is not. God is not anything that atheists might think it is, that's for sure."
Posted by: Ken Mareld | February 21, 2007 3:49 PM
If some frat bots tried this on their own penis I guess the result would be 'evolution in action'.
Ken
Posted by: Ken Mareld | February 21, 2007 3:52 PM
Ooops,
I screwed up the singular/plural, but messing up the y for a t made it even a bit Freudian.
I promise, I didn't try to do that.
Ken
Posted by: sleepyinsaudi | February 22, 2007 7:55 AM
Golly goodness gosh. I always learn something new when I read Pharyngula. Who would even think to do this?