Pharyngula

Comments

  1. #1 Inoculated Mind
    March 28, 2008

    Damn! How’d you post it before me?

    Spread this thing!

  2. #2 phenohype
    March 28, 2008

    it made my week, that’s for damn sure

  3. #3 Smart_Cookie
    March 28, 2008

    You science types sure must have WICKED parties. Rock on!

  4. #4 chuck goecke
    March 28, 2008

    I think this is the best thing ever!

  5. #5 JRQ
    March 28, 2008

    Now THAT’S framing.

  6. #6 Inoculated Mind
    March 28, 2008

    Now THAT’S framing.

    20 minutes and the thread is already won? No fair.

  7. #7 Luis
    March 28, 2008

    I’m honestly not quite sure who made that thing. I could swear it could be read slightly more easily as pro-creationist than pro-science.

    Who made that thing?

  8. #8 Tracy P. Hamilton
    March 28, 2008

    Love your hat, PZ!

  9. #9 Steve Ulven
    March 28, 2008

    Funny, but we need some pro-science death metal out there. Oh wait, it already is out there, just nobody but death metal fans care (and can understand the lyrics).

  10. #10 michael dorian
    March 28, 2008

    Whoever made that video will probably be working for MTV soon, or for whomever the hell he/she wants to be working for. Maybe some big Hollywood studio. They deserve an Oscar.

  11. #11 SteveC
    March 28, 2008

    The lyrics are a bit suspect and conflicted…

    “Big gadget, this is little tool.”

    “on the shoulders of midgets”

    “… even hate dog too”

    “lost at Scopes, beaten down by the dopes”

  12. #12 michael dorian
    March 28, 2008

    Yeah. Great line about dyslexia and hating dog. I think rhyming “dollah” and “Allah” is pretty badass, too.

  13. #13 JRQ
    March 28, 2008

    If I’m hearing the lyrics right, this is a strong pro-science message:

    “You see this battle’s been raging since Zeus was on the Bottle
    between science like Democritus and faith like Aristotle
    who said the mover was movin’ like some magic trick
    but that’s not good logic
    my posse’s too quick
    for this religious schtick.

    ‘Cause science is the only way to know y’all,
    So stand with me y’all
    or you can fall, y’all
    so go ahead and take your pick
    [Genie]: (Yeah tell ‘em dick)
    [Darwin]: because if you don’t know me
    [Dawkins]: You don’t know Dick”

    This is simply not how a creationist would parody the pro-science side. Where are the farting noises?

  14. #14 SteveC
    March 28, 2008

    > Darwin raising the roof

    yeah, that was really well done, and hilarious.

  15. #15 UprightAlice
    March 28, 2008

    Really great video. To me, it doesn’t matter who created it — creationist, evolutionist, other — it is all kinds of awesome. I guess that’s the difference between us and them: we can take a joke.

    But, like many, I’m leaning toward it being from a snarky evolutionist.

  16. #16 gyokusai
    March 28, 2008

    If it really is the work of the creationist, then he/she/it is vastly more talented and smart than the “Expelled” team. They ought to be jealous.

    So true!

    ^_^J.

  17. #17 Patrick
    March 28, 2008

    To steal a popular turn of phrase….the stupid (ly hilarious)…it burns…

    I mean seriously…I was laughing so hard my lungs started burning. Drs. Myers and Dawkins are certainly giving Dre a run for his money here…but it’s Charlie D that’s stealing the show. I think I watched that little bit at the end with him raising the roof a half dozen times.

  18. #18 FutureMD
    March 28, 2008

    Hitchens with a fat J in his mouth = hilarious. My girlfriend was pissed at me for playing this so loud.

  19. #19 Sue Laris
    March 28, 2008

    It’s because of the stupidity of the creationists that a parody like this, like LBS, leaves one wondering at first if it truly IS parody. I wondered myself, until I noticed three things:
    1. The quality of the work was relatively high (except for a talent for blustering, ass-covering and whining craetionists have never shown that they are capable of anything artistic, unless directly aping [heh!] another source.)
    2. It had actual humor (the characterizations were actually funny, while honest laughter is anathema to constipated fundy types the world over)
    3. The “related links” were ALL for Dawkins and other skeptic stuff.

  20. #20 James F
    March 28, 2008

    Does anyone know who is supposed to be in the audience at 0:17?

  21. #21 Kevin
    March 28, 2008

    I’d pay good money to get one of those hats with the squid on it (Hint, hint).

  22. #22 Brian Coughlan
    March 28, 2008

    As near as I can tell, all the lyrics and it IS overwhelmingly pro science. Enjoy:-)

    My name is D to the I to C to the K, Yeah I’m the Dickie D,
    I gots my phd and comin’ your way on the youtube to bust your world view
    so just listen to me and don’t you argue.

    You see, this battle’s been ragin’ since Zeus was on the bottle,
    between Science like Democritus and Faith like Aristotle,
    who said the mover wasn’t movin’ like some magic trick but
    that’s no good logic, my posse is far too quick for this
    religious sthick.

    Cos science is the only way to know y’all,
    you stand with me y’all,
    or you can fall y’all so go ahead and take your pick.

    ES: Yeah you tell him Rick …
    Darwin : Cos if you don’t know me …

    RD: YOU DON’T KNOW DICK!!

    Chorus : Yeah he’s the Dick to the Doc to the phd,
    he’s smarter than you he’s got a science degree!
    Yeah he’s the Dick to the Doc to the phd,
    he’s smarter than you he’s got a science degree!

    SH:On the shoulders of midgets we built up this machine,
    DD:YEAH!!!
    RD:Silence that watch… Paley
    Growing stronger and harder almost daily, storming wilber by force as we framed the discourse until the science split in schismatic divorce then Darwin took to the seas to see what no one had seen, and ever since then we’ve been increasingly keen, they may never adore us, but they’ll no longer ignore us, give it to ‘em PZ hit these BLEEP with the chorus!!!

    Chorus : Yeah he’s the Dick to the Doc to the phd,
    he’s smarter than you he’s got a science degree!
    The Dick to the Doc to the phd,
    he’s still smarter than you he studied biology!

    Then there was Darrow dukin’ it out with the straight and the narrow a ragin’ bull in the ring, he did his thing, and took it on the chin like he was bobby de niro.
    We might have lost at Scopes, beaten down by the dopes, and the stooges of popes, but in losin’ we coped, becomin’ more than we hoped, creationists slipped on the soap of their own slippery slope, what was impossible, improbable, is now wholly unstoppable …. the creationst foldup you hate us talking bull, don’t you know that this Dick BLEEP frickin’ unblockable …

    Chorus : Yeah he’s the Dick to the Doc to the phd,
    he’s smarter than you he’s got a science degree!
    The Dick to the Doc to the phd,
    he’s still smarter than you he studied biology!

    Now the machine of our making, sees culture ripe for the taking Cos I’m the rapper thats rappin the …. unlike the Catholic, Muslim or even the Jew, believes that no God but science could ever be true, hell if I was dyslexic I’d even hate “dog” too.

    Time to open your eyes, get yourself wise, the age of science has arised to be religions demise, and while you turkeys all cry, shouting why God oh why, I’ll still be poppin’ my collar earning my dollars in Allah.

    Chorus : Yeah he’s the Dick to the Doc to the phd,
    he’s smarter than you he’s got a science degree!
    The Dick to the Doc to the phd,
    he’s still smarter than you he studied biology!

    Chorus : Yeah he’s the Dick to the Doc to the phd,
    he’s smarter than you he’s got a science degree!
    The Dick to the Doc to the phd,
    he’s still smarter than you he studied biology!

  23. #23 SMgr
    March 28, 2008

    My bets are on the Southpark guys. It has all their hallmarks.

  24. #24 michael dorian
    March 29, 2008

    You think? That’s a good guess, but my money’s on someone less “notorious.”

  25. #25 David Dovey
    March 29, 2008

    “I get the feeling that the video is meant to poke fun at both sides of the evolution/ID debate, albeit I agree with the commenter who said that it seems too clever and hip to be the work of a creationist.”

    Agreed.

    For some reason Sam Harris with “grillz” seems to be do it for me. Not to mention RD before the songs’ movements (hands on hips, thrusting stomach out), and Dawkins “screwing the pooch.” Excellent.

    Although, knowing the quality of the average Youtube comment, I cringe to think what’s being said over on the actual Youtube page.

  26. #26 ilya
    March 29, 2008

    HiT dEeZ nUtZ wIt Da ChOrUs!

    Yea. It rules.

  27. #27 Jim Battle
    March 29, 2008

    How can any of the posters here think this was anything but anti-creationist, pro-science is beyond me.

    The line “…storming wilber by force” of course, is a reference to William Wilburforce. Brilliant.

    This is the best thing since slice sex. Or something like that.

  28. #28 polypterus
    March 29, 2008
  29. #29 CalGeorge
    March 29, 2008

    Instant classic!

    Poor Matt. The Nisbetian dream of limiting the influence of PZ and Richard Dawkins doesn’t seem to be going so well.

  30. #30 danny salamander
    March 29, 2008

    Whoever is responsible for this should take their video editing software, sell it, take the money, buy a dog and shoot the dog.

  31. #31 Robert Maynard
    March 29, 2008

    I know it’s appealing to think that nobody who could produce such an entertaining video could possibly be anything other than “one of us”, but the imagery used in the film and the rap is as follows:
    Scientists have a machine, built over a long period of time, which is programmed to identify and expunge dissidence. It stamps the guys head with “EXPELLED” and tosses him out of the college. The chorus chants an argument from authority without irony, and “Dicky D” continuously speaks condescendingly to listeners who might try and argue with him and challenge naturalism.
    While thick with clever historical references, there is nothing in it that counteracts the explicit imagery that scientific academia is an elitist system which acts with robotic dogmatism to bully and throw out dissidents, imagery which goes hand in hand with Expelled and the Intelligent Design movement.

  32. #32 allonym
    March 29, 2008

    Old Chuck D raisin’ the roof at 3:45 is what put me on the floor. Great post!

  33. #33 BathTub
    March 29, 2008

    The video is still up on Kevin Millers blog. With the use of the Expelled stamp on the forehead I am fairly sure this is an official ‘viral’ video for it.

  34. #34 Robert Maynard
    March 29, 2008

    Of course, whether or not this imagery is being used ironically is a matter of debate.
    Although I chuckle every time I watch it, I’m of the opinion that this is actually a sly pro-intelligent design piece, or at the very least that it has an anti-establishment, (rage) against the machine vibe. :P

  35. #35 Che
    March 29, 2008

    I still think it’s a viral video for Expelled that was created by a PR firm, hence the actual humor.

  36. #36 tacitus
    March 29, 2008

    I still think it’s a viral video for Expelled that was created by a PR firm, hence the actual humor.

    Now, wouldn’t that be the ultimate irony? A video meant to mock and ridicule evolutionists becoming a hit with the very same. Talk about missing the mark.

    In any case, if this was a viral video for Expelled, it would be a huge misstep. How many fundies and other ID-sympathizers do you know who appreciate rap music with bleeped out lyrics??

    You’d be lucky if you found enough to need two hands to count them. Not exactly a smart use of marketing dollars.

  37. #37 Dustin, OM
    March 29, 2008

    Pimp Dennett made my brain homunculus laugh until he spewed qualia all over the inside of my skull.

  38. #38 catta
    March 29, 2008

    If it’s meant to be insulting, it fails. Far too much fun. :)
    Ditto on the octopus hat. Those need to be mass-produced.

  39. #39 Infophile
    March 29, 2008

    Actually, I believe there are exceptions to trademark infringement. A couple relevant here are using it for parody and making critical commentary on it. Of course, that doesn’t stop some people from trying to sue…

  40. #40 genewitch
    March 29, 2008

    If they intended this to be derogatory to the science community, they failed. if they intended this as humor directed at everyone who gets it, they succeeded.

    How many ID/christian sites have linked to this?

  41. #41 Tyler DiPietro
    March 29, 2008

    @ Robert Maynard, #94

    As much antipathy as I’ll admit to having toward POMO and deconstructionist gibberish in humanities departments, at least in its critique of science, it doesn’t seem as though Expelled will appeal much to them. Most of them are still leftists critical of the hegemony of Christianity on American culture, and thus probably not sympathetic to its message of poor, persecuted white-male Christians. It might explain why only one has made it a particular hobby-horse (Steven Fuller). I’m not aware of any others.

  42. #42 Thomas S. Howard
    March 29, 2008

    Hah! Independent confirmation of my theory as to what really went on at the “Expelling”. I previously advanced this on AtBC:

    PZ wasn’t “hustling and bothering” as Stewie Blesshisheart thought, but he was hustling and flowing. In truth, he wasn’t even there to see the movie at all, but was rather trying to get a demo of his latest jam “It’s Hard Out There For A Shrimp” into the hands of SkinnyBrit, a.k.a HolyGhostFaceKillah, a.k.a. The Muthafuckin’ MCDawk.

  43. #43 BathTub
    March 29, 2008

    The high res version of this required me to have the like the latest ffdshow and mpc installed, but it was very nice to watch and is a great source of funny images.

    http://homepages.inspire.net.nz/~bathtub/pimpdan.jpg

  44. #44 Michael X
    March 29, 2008

    People, getting worked up over a stunt that didn’t happen is only going to get you laughed at. You’re giving the other side far more credit than it deserves. The expelled logo is not locked away in a jar that only creationists can open, much like the Harvard video on the inner life of a cell isn’t impenetrable either. You’re depriving yourselves of a good laugh, and giving kudos to the creators of this sharp rap.

  45. #45 Steven
    March 29, 2008

    Mega LuLz

    People are mental.

  46. #46 Michael X
    March 29, 2008

    A Cartesian Punch an Judy Booth!? That beats the hell outta my Cartesian finger puppets. So much more… historical.

  47. #47 Thomas S. Howard
    March 29, 2008

    Is it just me, or did the sound of the Great Machine activating come from Robocop 2?

  48. #48 Chris
    March 29, 2008

    @119: The lyrics are:
    “I’ll still be poppin’ my collar earning MORE dollars THAN Allah.”

    I just hope whoever produced this video produces more.

  49. #49 C. L. Hanson
    March 29, 2008

    Too funny!!!

    I opened up this post for my 6-year-old this morning (since he likes the science blog videos), and the first thing he said was “Look, a gavial!” (in the masthead). I hadn’t even noticed, so he went on to point out the shape of the snout, etc.

    (As for the video, I think the song went over Nico’s head, but he liked the part where the machine grabbed the guy and threw him.)

    I just put up a new post about one of Pharyngula’s youngest fans and the fun science he’s learned: Me, my kids, and “teach the controversy”.

  50. #50 Oliver
    March 29, 2008

    I’m almost 100% sure we’ll find this is from the South Park boys. They tend to take the piss out of all sides and the head on the body thing is their trademark. Also, the production values of this are such that only someone with a lot of resources and experience can produce it. It’s clearly a professional production. I love the squid on PZ’s hat.
    Overall this is amazing..

  51. #51 Michael X
    March 29, 2008

    Oliver,
    I can do this on one mac.
    South Park is not involved in this.

    And hey, I love the squid too.

  52. #52 Yes
    March 29, 2008

    Reply to #82
    “I pretty clearly stated that I found it really entertaining, but I’m puzzled by your insistence that ‘pop culture entertainment’ pieces are just meaningless things that aren’t specifically crafted to communicate ideas.”

    If it is specifically crafted to communicate ideas, those ideas aren’t clear anyway. It would have to be read symbolically… oh, you are right religious people use symbols all the time… just kidding so do chemists. <–That was a joke, poor or not.

    “At the moment I think the biggest joke is how much we’re willing to believe it’s not actually a dig at us, simply because of how funny and well made it is.”

    If that is true, it doesn’t matter it is still funny/entertaining. They won! We laughed. They are still wrong about the other things though. Also, if it really is a poorly crafted dig at us we have you working out the mistakes and we can expose it like the robots… uhm clear thinkers we are.

    Cheers

  53. #53 catta
    March 29, 2008

    Funny, that is a rather important year in English history. That was the year William The Bastard invaded and conquered the Anglo-Saxons from Normandy. I wonder if it means anything here?

    I dunno, does either side have a large contingency of longbowmen at their disposal? This could be fun…

  54. #54 386sx
    March 29, 2008

    Anybody who thinks this is not a satire of Expelled and their recent PR debacle needs to grow an irony gland.

    Dude you’re the one who is da irony deficient if you don’t thinks it was from the Expelled crew yo!

  55. #55 MC Escher
    March 29, 2008

    @ Chris and Kathryn re: the lyrics.

    You are both right! Appreciate the correction.
    The line ought to read,
    ‘I’ll still be popping my collar earning more dollars than Allah’

    ‘Shtick’ should be sans ‘c’.

    And it should read Dawk, not Doc.

    Ah, but it is late and many moons have past!
    Good thing I titled it the semi-authoritative version.

  56. #56 Michael X
    March 29, 2008

    Oy, I give up. Yes, everyone. It was creationists. They hide under your bed and make rap videos that seem like they should be cool but really arn’t! So clever they are… Just think how sharp a movie made by them would be if they could be so stealthy with a single rap video. I quake and tremble…

  57. #57 HadasS
    March 29, 2008

    “There is really no sign he lost that debate. He was wrong yes, but much of the evidence showed he did very well against Huxley. It was that debate that turned Huxley around and made him realize he had to learn the art of debate and command it, hence “Darwin’s Bulldog.”"

    I’m pretty sure that at least the late Steven Gould claimed Wilberforce lost the debate, but it could be just his opinion.

  58. #58 Lago
    March 29, 2008

    No, Gould claimed the popular idea that Wilberforce lost the debate was wrong…

  59. #59 Lago
    March 29, 2008

    “It’s pretty clearly a pro-Expelled video, folks.”

    Did you actually listen to the lyrics? Seems rather pro science actually, and says things that are not in-line with most creationists, especially ID people…

  60. #60 Physis
    March 29, 2008

    Also, that isn’t the official Expelled logo that is stamped on the guy’s head; of course, a viral video might not use an official logo, but still.

  61. #61 Thomas S. Howard
    March 29, 2008

    Oh noes! We’re all making DESIGN INFERENCES. Stop right now everybody. Darwinism depends on your restraint.

  62. #62 Why
    March 29, 2008

    Detailed explanation of a joke kills it.

  63. #63 henwli
    March 29, 2008

    Absolutely fantastic video. This song will inhabit my iTunes “All Time Greats playlist” for some time to come. A million thanks for the torrent link, Daoud. Low-res doesn’t do justice to Genie’s bodacious bod.

    @tacitus #83

    Now, wouldn’t that be the ultimate irony? A video meant to mock and ridicule evolutionists becoming a hit with the very same. Talk about missing the mark.

    Been there, done that. I made a quick “Way of the Master radio” remix (music only) some time ago, in an attempt to parody Todd Friel’s arguments against evolution. And dontchaknow, someone pasted my track into a video promoting creationism. Of course, they edited it a bit to better suit their purposes (i.e. removed the punchline).

  64. #64 Scott Campbell
    March 29, 2008

    Between yesterday’s phone call episode and this video, my weekend is off to the most amazing start.

    Hilarious.

  65. #65 Why
    March 29, 2008

    Kills it from the tellers point of view.

  66. #66 catta
    March 29, 2008

    @Thomas, you’re right of course. :) I think I got mixed up because of the shot-in-the-eye legend. And I really should know better. *sigh* Quote from Harold: “I’ve got to keep an eye out for William”…

  67. #67 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 29, 2008

    It’s a bit in the style of JibJab, but they always sign their work.

    What about the two scientists with the fake beards near the start? Aren’t those the exact beards of Jib and Jab?

    I’m almost 100% sure we’ll find this is from the South Park boys. They tend to take the piss out of all sides and the head on the body thing is their trademark.

    I can’t see piss taken on the Four Horsemen here — it’s all obvious parody. Concerning the rest of the second sentence, have you never been to http://www.jibjab.com?

    I don’t think the South Park boys would censor any language out of their video!

    Good point.

    ————–

    While thick with clever historical references, there is nothing in it that counteracts the explicit imagery that scientific academia is an elitist system which acts with robotic dogmatism to bully and throw out dissidents, imagery which goes hand in hand with Expelled and the Intelligent Design movement.

    It makes fun of “the explicit imagery that scientific academia is an elitist system which acts with robotic dogmatism to bully and throw out dissidents, imagery which goes hand in hand with Expelled and the Intelligent Design movement”.

    If there are any cdesign proponentsists that are capable of “mirrored reverse-triple-satire”, why is Expelled such crap?

    And even without this argument, the parody is obvious. “Sure we kick little puppies — we’re whatever threatens you!” It’s way over the top, with the university expelling people in lab coats like a geyser, and all the Democritus and Wilberfore references just don’t make sense if it isn’t satire.

    While the video is absolutely hilarious, I’m pretty sure it’s a viral video for Expelled [...]. Sure, it’ll probably appeal to their target demographic about as much as Slayer, but they haven’t exactly shown themselves to be exemplars of competence…

    I’m pretty sure that’s exactly what just happened. The Ass Prod is a giant failure of humanity.

    Yeah, I’m with #75. This has “Expelled” written all over it. They paid someone a good chunk of change to come up with this “viral” marketing campaign. However, idiots that they are, this too blew up in their faces.

    This is the Argument from Infinite Incompetence, frankly. You cannot be a meta-idiot — if you’re an idiot, it shows!

    ———

    I take it “raising the roof” is some kind of fixed phrase? What does it mean?

  68. #68 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 29, 2008

    It’s a bit in the style of JibJab, but they always sign their work.

    What about the two scientists with the fake beards near the start? Aren’t those the exact beards of Jib and Jab?

    I’m almost 100% sure we’ll find this is from the South Park boys. They tend to take the piss out of all sides and the head on the body thing is their trademark.

    I can’t see piss taken on the Four Horsemen here — it’s all obvious parody. Concerning the rest of the second sentence, have you never been to http://www.jibjab.com?

    I don’t think the South Park boys would censor any language out of their video!

    Good point.

    ————–

    While thick with clever historical references, there is nothing in it that counteracts the explicit imagery that scientific academia is an elitist system which acts with robotic dogmatism to bully and throw out dissidents, imagery which goes hand in hand with Expelled and the Intelligent Design movement.

    It makes fun of “the explicit imagery that scientific academia is an elitist system which acts with robotic dogmatism to bully and throw out dissidents, imagery which goes hand in hand with Expelled and the Intelligent Design movement”.

    If there are any cdesign proponentsists that are capable of “mirrored reverse-triple-satire”, why is Expelled such crap?

    And even without this argument, the parody is obvious. “Sure we kick little puppies — we’re whatever threatens you!” It’s way over the top, with the university expelling people in lab coats like a geyser, and all the Democritus and Wilberfore references just don’t make sense if it isn’t satire.

    While the video is absolutely hilarious, I’m pretty sure it’s a viral video for Expelled [...]. Sure, it’ll probably appeal to their target demographic about as much as Slayer, but they haven’t exactly shown themselves to be exemplars of competence…

    I’m pretty sure that’s exactly what just happened. The Ass Prod is a giant failure of humanity.

    Yeah, I’m with #75. This has “Expelled” written all over it. They paid someone a good chunk of change to come up with this “viral” marketing campaign. However, idiots that they are, this too blew up in their faces.

    This is the Argument from Infinite Incompetence, frankly. You cannot be a meta-idiot — if you’re an idiot, it shows!

    ———

    I take it “raising the roof” is some kind of fixed phrase? What does it mean?

  69. #69 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 29, 2008

    I don’t get it? Could someone please explain it to me?

    What exactly don’t you get?

  70. #70 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 29, 2008

    I don’t get it? Could someone please explain it to me?

    What exactly don’t you get?

  71. #71 Jack Rawlinson
    March 29, 2008

    Hilarious. I’m baffled by the people here who think for one second this is anything but pro-science and anti-IDiot. The whole bit with the machine ruthlessly expelling ID-ers is clearly an OTT send-up of the “Expelled” paranoia. And the lyrics… totally pro-science, delivered with the characteristic dick-waving arrogance of the musical genre. Come on. No way is this pro-ID or pro-Expelled.

  72. #72 Reginald Selkirk
    March 29, 2008

    Whoever made this may not have a lot of friends. The “backup vocals” are the very same voice as the lead, although the visual is of PZ rather than Dicky D.

  73. #73 Laser Potato
    March 29, 2008

    Shorter G-Unit: everything is an anti-Christian conspiracy, including donuts. ESPECIALLY donuts.

  74. #74 ice9
    March 29, 2008

    I would have paid for this if somebody had asked.

    Wasn’t the machine in The Incredibles part of some kind of artificial selection process, and Mr. I was coopted to participate in the process…and eventually the machine went for its creator? Can I get credit for a valid observation?

    ice

  75. #75 Wesley R. Elsberry
    March 29, 2008

    “No, Gould claimed the popular idea that Wilberforce lost the debate was wrong…”

    IIRC, Gould’s analysis was that at the time, people did think that Wilberforce lost the debate, but they didn’t think that Huxley’s response was the critical one, but rather that of (again, IIRC) Hooker.

  76. #76 gyokusai
    March 29, 2008

    “amendment,” arrgh! Am I getting dxsleyic here? Beware of the god!

    ^_^J.

  77. #77 Puddock
    March 29, 2008

    FAB!! Nothing more to say, just FAB!!

  78. #78 gyokusai
    March 29, 2008

    Danny Schadesez:

    Shouldn’t it be “Dick to the DAWK” instead of “Dick to the DOC”? I guess they both work. DOC to the PHD just seems redundant. :)

    Has been pointed out (see #129, #139), and it’s already sort of official, I guess! :-)

    ^_^J.

  79. #79 Bee
    March 29, 2008

    Srsly funny!

    PZed, you do attract a few anal overanalyzers.

  80. #80 Beth
    March 29, 2008

    OMFG that was all sorts of awesome.

  81. #81 Citizen Z
    March 29, 2008

    Sign that it was made by the creationists/Expelled crew:

    Lyrics.
    Looks like it cost money to make.

    Sign that it was not by the Expelled crew:

    Whoever made the video knows what Richard Dawkins looks like.

  82. #82 Blake Stacey
    March 29, 2008

    ice9:

    Wasn’t the machine in The Incredibles part of some kind of artificial selection process, and Mr. I was coopted to participate in the process…and eventually the machine went for its creator? Can I get credit for a valid observation?

    Yep, I think so.

  83. #83 tsiatko
    March 29, 2008

    Since we don’t have a clear explaination of who created the video, the answer must be obvious, God.

  84. #84 C. L. Hanson
    March 29, 2008

    This whole: “He’s smarter than you, he’s got a science degree” reminds me of “Dr. Science” when I was a kid: “He knows more than you do, he’s got a Master’s degree — in Science!”

  85. #85 Nullifidian
    March 29, 2008

    Sign that it was not by the Expelled crew:

    Whoever made the video knows what Richard Dawkins looks like.

    Citizen Z FTW!

  86. #86 alex fairchld
    March 29, 2008

    People, come on – it is OBVIOUSLY a viral marketing piece for the Expelled film.

    - the timing
    - the anonymous nature
    - ‘Expelled’ logo prominently featured within 1 minute

    granted it’s a little ambiguous in content, but that’s exactly what these viral campaigns are all about. keep you guessing, but you still talk about the issue/product.

  87. #87 Dutch Delight
    March 29, 2008

    You should wonder whether there is any actual energy in the universe at all. I’ve understood that it might be the case that the total energy in the univery is 0 and all the forces and matter in the universe cancel each other out in the end.

  88. #88 MC Escher
    March 29, 2008

    woah.. Youtube pulled the video already!?

  89. #89 Ian
    March 29, 2008

    #235: “This is far too funny and clever to be the work of IDots/creationists. I can’t see them giving PZ a squid hat.”

    Exactly! The squid hat can be nothing but a subtle compliment to PZ. The Expelled crowd simply wouldn’t do that.

  90. #90 Ian
    March 29, 2008

    #180: “The machine looks like one of Agatha Clay’s little helpers, only megasized.”

    I thought it looked familiar! I’m just ashamed I didn’t notice it myself.

  91. #91 Brownian, OM
    March 29, 2008

    It appears that a mix-up in the evidence room caused an incorrect link to appear in the comment above.

    The sentence should have read: If memory serves, I believe cdesign proponentsists’ disdain for art has already been established.

  92. #92 kathryn in california
    March 29, 2008

    Question: who are the scientists in the short film 30 seconds in?

    The scientist “little tool”–take away almost all of his mustache, remove the sideburn (triangle), and flip the picture. With that sweep of black hair he looks like a historic figure.

  93. #93 Ferrous Patella
    March 29, 2008

    The “scientist” thrown out the window was named Bill. No sweater thought.

  94. #94 Pieter Kok
    March 29, 2008

    WRT the removed version: MC Escher (#241) said it was less censored. Perhaps the user thought it better to release only the censored version and pulled the original himself. That would be consistent with the YouTube message “removed by the user”.

  95. #95 JCE
    March 29, 2008

    I see some of the irony meters are still in need of recalibration after last week. Is it pro-creationist? Is it anti-creationist? TEACH THE (non-existent) CONTROVERSY!

    This is OBVIOUSLY a viral marketing campaign…

    …for squid berets. It’s working. I want one, Julie K (#235) wants one and there are probably many people who still haven’t come out of the closet or even admitted to themselves that they want one. So – any ideas on how to get our collective tentacles on some hats?

  96. #96 Sastra
    March 29, 2008

    I love this video — and thanks to the folks who went through and did the translation. There are a lot of “in” jokes I missed the first time. And so many sly references that it’s clear this was done by someone following the issue very well.

    To be honest, I’m not entirely sure if it’s meant to be a creationist satire of Dawkins/Darwinism, or an evolutionist satire of what creationists think of Dawkins/Darwinism. Remember, the clip of the PZ Myers interview in the movie had a lot of us wondering what the big deal was — he said that religion was just fine as a hobby: that’s not offensive. And yet the audience gasped. Reciting the phrase “he’s smarter than you, he’s got a science degree” could, in theory, be their attempt to push the anti-establishment button for Christian teens, on the assumption that they’ll automatically scorn an “educated person” who lacks the wisdom to know God — or think he knows more than what their God-given common sense can figure out without the book-larnin’..

    Still, if I had to guess, I’d agree with the majority and say that it’s coming from the pro-science side (the robot, btw, clearly represent mechanistic science.) If it was coming from the EXpelled side, it would be filled with everyone applauding rows and rows of goose-stepping Nazis. I find it very unlikely that someone who had something to do with the movie would make no references to Hitler at all, considering that they constantly shove in clips throughout. It was their big climactic point. I saw nada nazis.

    I’d also agree with the majority and say that I wouldn’t care even if it was a pro-creationism video anyway. It’s funny. I’ll forgive almost anything if it’s funny ;)

  97. #97 MAJeff, OM
    March 29, 2008

    So – any ideas on how to get our collective tentacles on some hats?

    Create a design and put it on cafepress.

    On the other hand, isn’t PZ working on a book (I seem to recall a post about this). Remember how Borders (I think) in the UK was putting godless christmas cards (or something similar) in The God Delusion? OK, I may be off on details, but wouldn’t squid hats make an awesome product tie-in to that book?

  98. #98 MAJeff, OM
    March 29, 2008

    To be honest, I’m not entirely sure if it’s meant to be a creationist satire of Dawkins/Darwinism, or an evolutionist satire of what creationists think of Dawkins/Darwinism.

    Hold on, hold on. You mean texts don’t have inherent meaning, but are open to interpretation? Don’t tell the lit crit folks–they’ll assume they were right.

  99. #99 theorist
    March 29, 2008

    Conspiracy theory:

    What if “they” made the video slightly ambiguous on purpose. Then we all start making comments about how great we think it is. THEN the “originators” are revealed… THE DISCOVERY INSTITUTE. They post all our praise on their website, and include at the end of the Expelled movie.

    I’m worried. In any case, the video is pretty effin funny.

  100. #100 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 29, 2008

    It’s the palms to the ceiling, pushing up motion that is being done in the last few seconds. It’s an unsubtle request for louder audience reaction.

    Ah. Like a shield saying “APPLAUSE”. I see, thanks. :-) Fits the rest of the parody. :-)

    And I thought the New York Dolls’ “Dance Like a Monkey” video was the coolest ever.

    “This video is not available in your country.” WTF? I’m in France. ~:-|

    Sign that it was not by the Expelled crew:

    Whoever made the video knows what Richard Dawkins looks like.

    ROTFLMAO!!!

    It’s right down their lane both visually and in the aspect not taking a definite stand in the conflict they satirize.

    It does take a definite stand: it makes fun of the idea the makers of Expelled! have of science by exaggerating it into the ridiculous (those big dollar necklaces, for example — way over the top) — and so do JibJab videos. Have you watched those on Fearless Flightsuit, like the year reviews of 2O5 and 2O6 and “the world is nuckin’ futs”? (W: “Ah’llllliminate the taxes…” People in super-stretch limo sticking their fists out: “…tha’r breakin’ ah-r backses!”)

    Thus to approximate the mental anguish inflicted on the defendants by concern trolling, I sentence the plaintiffs to 2.8 Tc.

    How does that work?

    Did anyone else notice the Wilhelm scream at 1:39 as Aristotle falls down the well?

    Link doesn’t work.

    I see some of the irony meters are still in need of recalibration after last week. Is it pro-creationist? Is it anti-creationist? TEACH THE (non-existent) CONTROVERSY!

    LOL!

    This is OBVIOUSLY a viral marketing campaign…

    …for squid berets. It’s working.

    ROTFL!

  101. #101 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 29, 2008

    What if “they” made the video slightly ambiguous on purpose.

    It isn’t ambiguous, for crying out loud! It uses the Colbert approach: “This administration isn’t sinking, this administration is soaring! If anything, they’re rearranging deck chairs on the Hindenburg!!!”

  102. #102 Thanny
    March 29, 2008

    #183:

    The guy hitting Paley is David Hume. Yet more evidence (as if it’s needed) that the creator couldn’t be a creationist.

  103. #103 CalGeorge
    March 29, 2008

    I see no ambiguity whatsoever.

    There’s the money worship at the end – and Darwin tries to object – but it’s just more of the in-your-face approach this video gloriously, thankfully champions.

    Dicky D and PZ! Wooooooo!

  104. #104 Julie K
    March 29, 2008

    #273 – He throws up. Darwin was terribly sea-sick during his voyage.

  105. #105 Wrought
    March 29, 2008

    Everything’s been said, but I couldn’t resist a comment on this brilliant, brilliant piece of parody.

    Of course it’s pro-science. The lyrics are clear on this.
    It sends up the religious by playing on their fears.

    The evil glint in Dawkins’ eye is just brilliant. How it will convince the religious that they’re right, and all they feared is coming true!

    They’ll HATE that we LOVE this. They’ll see all those dollar signs and KNOW this is EVIL and the work of the DEVIL. They’ll say “see how those atheists worship MONEY? Even they should recoil in FEAR at this imagery!” They just won’t get the JOKE at all.

    (The video is so damn funny I’m capitalising words to express my joy.)

    Hurrah! How can we make more people watch this? :)

  106. #106 Russell Blackford
    March 29, 2008

    Actually, gvkousai, it’s the same Stanley Fish – or maybe you know that and were joking? I hope I’ve cleared it up for anyone who took you seriously.

    And I’m rather surprised to hear that the New Critics believed anything as crude as that texts have fixed meanings.

    The New Criticism was a lot more sophisticated than that, and dificult to explain in a brief blog comment, but its main point was that literary texts are rife with ambiguity and various kinds of irony. Meaning can’t be read off them in some transparent way and cannot be equated with authorial intention.

    What might be said, I suppose, is that the New Critics were more optimistic about nailing down the ambiguities than some of the folks (most spectacularly the Yale deconstructionists) who came after them, though I’m not at all sure they were wrong about this. Literary texts are, indeed, ambiguous … but in practice they are not infinitely ambiguous because interpretation is always constrained by conventions for their interpretation (and they are usually written by people who have internalised those conventions). Actually, I don’t think Fish would deny that much, in fact much of his work is designed to make that point. However, he’d probably want to say that these conventions are ultimately arbitrary, or something of the sort. There could then be an argument with him about what this really means, etc., etc.

    The Yale deconstructionists obtained some of their most bizarre effects by deliberately reading texts in ways that did not use the conventions of interpretation that we usually employ (tacitly or explicitly), e.g. they would sometimes interpret texts by digging back into the etymologies of words to find meanings that would be “dead” as possibilities for most people … probably including the authors. Such techniques produced some bravura performances, but I think it was a dead-end for trying to understand how meaning is actually created by language.

  107. #107 Lago
    March 29, 2008

    I had someone that produces rap stuff listen to the video and he said it was almost certainly Jamie Kennedy from Malibu’s Most wanted

  108. #108 Torbjörn Larsson, OM
    March 29, 2008

    Oh my dog, that kicks ass! Someone must have studied biology!

    I had a hard time stopping ROTFL. And just thinking how that creationist frame of a machine of science must clash with their frame of a machine in the cell is throwing me in into another fit – it is truly a COG DISS machine.

    Let’s hear it for The DICK to the DAWK to the PhD!!!

  109. #109 Torbjörn Larsson, OM
    March 29, 2008

    Oh my dog, that kicks ass! Someone must have studied biology!

    I had a hard time stopping ROTFL. And just thinking how that creationist frame of a machine of science must clash with their frame of a machine in the cell is throwing me in into another fit – it is truly a COG DISS machine.

    Let’s hear it for The DICK to the DAWK to the PhD!!!

  110. #110 trimtab
    March 29, 2008

    I took the second complete lyrics I found in the comments, and brought minor corrections and layout changes, while integrating other people’s corrections.

    Changed the “Yeah” in the chorus to “Yo”, that’s what I hear.

    I stand by “the age of sciences will rise to be religion’s demise”, again, that’s what I hear.

    —————————
    Beware the Believers

    Hello, is this on?
    Can I get some more hydrogen in my test tube, please?

    My name is D to the I to C to the K,
    yeah I’m the Dickie D, I gots my PhD
    and comin’ your way on the Youtube, to bust your world view,
    so just listen to me and don’t you argue.

    You see, this battle’s been ragin’ since Zeus was on the bottle,
    ‘tween Science like Democritus and Faith like Aristotle,?
    who said the mover was unmovin’ like some magic trick,
    but that’s no good logic, my posse is far too quick for this religious sthick.

    ‘Cuz science is the only way to know y’all,
    you stand with me y’all, or you can fall y’all,
    so go ahead and take your pick…

    ES: Yeah you tell him Rick …?
    Darwin : ‘Cuz if you don’t know me …
    RD: YOU DON’T KNOW DICK!

    Chorus: Yo he’s the Dick to the Dawk to the PhD,
    ?he’s smarter than you, he’s got a science degree!?
    Dick to the Dawk to the PhD,?
    he’s smarter than you, he’s got a science degree!

    SH: On the shoulders of midgets we built up this machine,
    ?DD: YEAH!
    RD: Science silenced that watchdog wingnut Paley?
    growing stronger and harder almost daily,
    storming Wilber?by?force as we framed the discourse
    that faith and science are split in schismatic divorce.

    Then Darwin took to the seas to see what no one had seen,
    and ever since then we’ve been increasingly keen,
    they may never adore us, but they’ll no longer ignore us,
    give it to ‘em PZ hit these ?BLEEP? with the chorus!!!

    Chorus: Yo he’s the Dick to the Dawk to the PhD,
    ?he’s smarter than you, he’s got a science degree!
    ?Dick to the Dawk to the PhD,?
    he’s still smarter than you, he studied biology!

    ?Then there was Darrow,
    dukin’ it out with the straight and the narrow,?
    a ragin’ bull in the ring, he did his thing,
    and took it on the chin like he was Bobby De Niro.
    We might have lost at Scopes, beaten down by the dopes,
    and the stooges of popes, but in losin’ we coped,
    becomin’ more than we hoped,
    creationists slipped on the soap of their own slippery slope.

    What was impossible, improbable, is now wholly unstoppable untoppleable,
    the Dick Dawk’ll roll up as you creationists foldup,
    you haters talkin’ bull, don’t you know that this Dick is un-?BLEEP?-frickin’ blockable?

    Chorus: Yo he’s the Dick to the Dawk to the phd,?
    he’s smarter than you, he’s got a science degree!?
    Dick to the Dawk to the PhD,?
    he’s still smarter than you, he studied biology!

    Now the machine of our making, sees culture ripe for the taking,
    ‘cuz I’m the rappinest, rabidest atheist who,
    unlike the Catholic, the Muslim or even the Jew,
    believes that no God but science could ever be true,
    hell, if I was dyslexic I’d even hate “dog” too.

    Time to open your eyes, get yourself wise,
    the age of sciences will rise to be religion’s demise,
    and while you churchies all cry, shouting ‘why God oh why,’
    I’ll still be poppin’ my collar earning my dollars in Allah.
    Allah!
    Darwin: Yes well I’ve told you.

    Chorus: Yo he’s the Dick to the Dawk to the phd,?
    he’s smarter than you, he’s got a science degree!
    ?Dick to the Dawk to the phd,?
    he’s still smarter than you, he studied biology!

    Chorus: Dick to the Dawk to the phd,?
    he’s smarter than you, he’s got a science degree!?
    Dick to the Dawk to the phd,?
    he’s still smarter than you, he studied biology!

  111. #111 trimtab
    March 29, 2008

    ZekeCDN #291

    I hear it now. That makes more sense.
    Thanks.

  112. #112 Bob L
    March 30, 2008

    Dawkins saying “If you don’t know me, you don’t DICK!” LOL What a dig and the Expelled crowd.

  113. #113 gyokusai
    March 30, 2008

    Russell Blackford, great comment, thanks! Now, I was indeed seriously foreshortening the New Critics’ position, you are of course right. But I didn’t insinuate that “fixed meaning” equates “authorial intention,” especially not with the New Critics! It’s just that they came pretty close to “fixed” (inherent) meaning, ambiguities included (7 types and stuff, but you know that, obviously :-)) I still like to read some of their brilliant essays from time to time. (BTW I’m pretty close to the Yale-ies myself, always been fascinated by the Johnson/Miller/Culler brand, and I just submitted my ph.d. thesis with a topic in that neighborhood. Culler was, by the way, an outspoken atheist, as was Empson, and they didn’t mince words.)

    Your remark that decon was a dead-end for trying to understand how meaning is actually created by language I find stunning—stunningly interesting, that is. I have to read your blog right away! And will come back to you, if you don’t mind, but not necessarily here in PZ’s backyard ;-)

    And sadly no, I wasn’t joking about the Fishes, not at all. It actually never occured to me that it’s the same person! How could it! Is that true? No it can’t be. You’re kidding.

    Okay I checked. He is. Mind if I puke? :-((( As if lit crit didn’t have a bad enough rep with the science crowd already *sigh*

    ^_°J.

  114. #114 kathryn in california
    March 30, 2008

    Taw @287
    Any guesses as to who the two scientists “Bill” and “Boris / little tool” are in the mini-film 30 seconds in? Boris almost but not quite looks like a Godwin’s rule character–hair parted on the other side, as if the image is flipped–to me.

    trimtrab @290

    What you hear as
    “I’ll still be poppin’ my collar earning my dollars in Allah.”

    I think could be
    “I’ll still be poppin’ my collar earning my dollars per hour.”

  115. #115 tus
    March 30, 2008

    man, this video was just so wrong…but so funny…i wish to never see Eugene scott in a bikini rubbing her stomach again….other than that this was a great video (and from one who loathes rap, thats saying something)

    and yes this is definately pro-science…creationists never understand enough about science to mention some of the things they listed, it takes someone who appriciates science to realy get this video, let alone make it. it seems to be parodying creationist claims such as dogmatic science, this idea of dawkins as a holy figure for atheists, the appeal to authority they use to say “look this guy is a scientist and he says intelegent design makes sense, and he is smarter than you” and it dispenses with creationists’ favourite claims, while a crationists made video would instead tote up those claims and make the refutation exceptionaly riddiculous. while this seems to make the claim itself riddiculous, creationists arent good at much except PR, they are politicians. and they would not give up an opportunity to make a fool of the opposition and make their claims look better. they would have named POOR scientists not good scientists and they would have downplayed faith in reguard to aristotle maybe even inverted their positions in the song. they would have picked the best of the pro-creationist side and the worst of the opposition.

    on top of that, its impossible for a creationist to make a video that doesnt make an atheist’s skin crawl.
    the fact so many atheists here like it is sign, its not a creationist. (which may have been proven in the past 300 posts, i kinda stoped around 60….)

  116. #116 kathryn in california
    March 30, 2008

    So can anyone give a short lesson on the technical details of how this was made?

    Are the dancing bodies taken from a video? Or has the state of the art in computer graphics gotten good enough to generate the dancers.

    Because most of the dancers look like they could be straight from a video. But then there’s Darwin with his 19th century suit–that would have to be made just for this, no?

  117. #117 Michael X
    March 30, 2008

    Kathryn,
    The process is simple. The bodies are of one man recorded normally. Superimposed on his face is the 2D face of whoever, which is likely a photo taken from the web. The jaw is then animated to follow the speech. The background is substituted the same way the faces are, in a way not unlike “cut and paste”. Simple really, and with technology as cheap as it is today, it can be done for very little money. All that is required is the right equipment and knowledge of the editing program. This of course doesn’t detract from the artistic skill and sharp usage of such technology, though the nuts and bolts are fundamentally easy to grasp.

  118. #118 kathryn in california
    March 30, 2008

    Michael X,

    Thanks. Do you think the artist used someone else’s video of dancers? It looks like standard music video dancing, with (if that’s what was done) a good job of extracting only the dancers for the picture.

    If he did, how did he do Darwin–could he superimpose / animate the clothing on top of the dancer’s body?

  119. #119 Michael X
    March 30, 2008

    Kathryn,
    I’m pretty sure it was the same guy all around doing everything. Either that or he has alot of similarly pudgy friends who wanted to be in the video too. ;) As the guy seems pretty proficient in his skills I think he’s also pretty aware of the style he’s creating and the dancing involved, though I wouldn’t really call much of it “dancing” exactly, so I wouldn’t put it out of his ability to do it himself.

    As for the coat, it would be easy to find any long “oldish” looking coat, from either a thrift store, or a local costume shop, (if of course the artist didn’t have one himself or know someone else who did), and not really worry about any other authenticity issues. I’m pretty sure the guy just threw the coat on, and filmed the part.

  120. #120 kathryn in california
    March 30, 2008

    Michael X,
    For some reason–laughing too much, I guess–I didn’t notice that they’re all the same person.

    As a very uncoordinated person I consider any kind of competent movement to music as “dancing.” Is there a term / jargon for having moves to go along with the rhyme and the rhythm? It isn’t just standing with a microphone.

  121. #121 TOO MUCH
    March 30, 2008

    Talk about seeing what you want to see. Is there a scientific term for that?
    After the comments the machine is fitting and funny, look at yourself. The rest of the video is well done on many levels.

  122. #122 MC Escher
    March 30, 2008

    Thanks for making the lyrics a little more readable, Trimtab.

    I think you are dead on with the line “the age of sciences will rise to be religion’s demise” but I’d wager a fat stack of greenbacks that the final line before the ending chorus is “I’ll keep on poppin’ my collar earnin’ more dollars than Allah!”

    Oh, and I think that’s a “Holla’” immediately following, not another “Allah”.

    I suspect the author would disdain the sort of poetical laziness of rhyming Allah with Allah.

    This cat’s far to hip for that, Jack.

    Can I get a what, what?

  123. #123 Russell Blackford
    March 30, 2008

    gyokusai – I’m waving at you, but alas this (literary theory, etc.) isn’t stuff that I normally discuss in my blog. I couldn’t resist the opening here. Yes, Stanley Fish has a lot to answer for, not just as a literary critic but as a proponent of an entire theoretical approach to law, culture, religion, and much else. His literary theory and criticism is just one manifestation of it, and it includes a bizarre hostility to anything that smacks of Enlightenment liberalism.

    My view of the video, a view which I’ve been arguing for over on Dawkins’ site, is that it wasn’t made by either creationist types or scientific rationalist types. It was made, says I, by satirists with a South Park kind of sensibility (but not necessarily the South Park folks themselves). I.e., by people who would think that, in the end, Dawkins, etc., are probably right on the facts about evolution (and maybe even atheism) but are nonetheless obnoxiously arrogant, self-congratulatory, insensitive, ruthless, materialist, etc., etc. That’s the message that came across for me. They’re depicted as glorying in their victories with some intellectual justification, but in a totally obnoxious and destructive way, showing contempt and intolerance for anyone from outside their tribe and with a different view.

    It’ll be fascinating when/if we find out who perpetrated it. It has enough layers of irony to make me hesitate, but I’ve watched it a few times now and I’m reasonably confident that that’s the sensibility that it’s coming from.

    The risk that it takes is that Dawkins, etc., are presented with so much goddamn energy that they can seem just bad-ass and cool, whatever was actually intended. If it was done by people from the Expelled side, all I can say is that they lost control of their material … but I doubt that that’s the situation.

  124. #124 Lago
    March 30, 2008

    Still going with my suggestion it is Jamie Kennedy and friends

  125. #125 kevinj
    March 30, 2008

    @ Peter Ashby

    nope crossbows were around at the time of hastings although they were simple mechanically speaking, eg fairly weak in power and simple trigger mechanisms (the two being connected). there is evidence of normal bows (from the tapestry) as well although nothing like the english and welsh warbows.

    crossbows may have been put on the badlist in the 1100s, although that is debated and it certainly wasnt kept to.

    back on subject it is an amusing film, certainly looks better than that expelled shite.

  126. #126 386sx
    March 30, 2008

    Maybe it was produced by Richard Dawkins. It is titled “Richard Dawkins – Beware the Believers”. Note the “Richard Dawkins” in there in the title there. He is supposed to be a pretty “hip dude”, right? Come on people put two and two together.

    Keep pushin it kids it’s on it’s way to the top yeahh baby!!

  127. #127 386sx
    March 30, 2008

    Keep pushin it kids it’s on it’s way to the top yeahh baby!!

    Seriously it could easily go to number one… on a Sunday! Wake up you guys!!

  128. #128 Citizen Z
    March 30, 2008

    “I’ll keep on poppin’ my collar earnin’ more dollars than Allah!”

    I am 100% certain he is saying “I’ll keep Mary Poppins on call, yeah, singin’ more operas than Callas!”

  129. #129 ice9
    March 30, 2008

    I’m no expert but isn’t that an octopus on the beret? Don’t matter I want one.
    If we make them, we’ll need some XXL’s.

    ice

  130. #130 MicroZealous
    March 30, 2008

    A danger to life and property – I nearly choked on my coffee and sprayed my keyboard. Professionaly done and highly recommended. As to the agenda (reason vs faith)? The very ambiguity of the message encouraged me to listen carefully and make my own judgement. To me, this is a core value of reason. Hmmm . . . I choose . . .Reason!

  131. #131 amk
    March 30, 2008

    This video wins the Internet (it’s still up for grabs, right?)

    Never mind the mollusc hat. I like the fish-with-legs emblems that appear on various heads. I take that as subverting a Christian symbol to signify fish evolving into land animals, something to which creobots particularly object. Is this original?

  132. #133 buck
    March 30, 2008

    guys guys…the ID folks are too dumb to pull of this level of satire…and the references are too many and too subtle…most importantly the lyrics…definitely a pro-science production

    i have a hunch pz may have a big part in making this…i see that he hasn’t given a hat-tip like he normally does when someone refers him to it…also notice the lack of input from pz after the speculation is running wild? very very suspicious…also, seed media has the needed money…

  133. #134 Gordy
    March 30, 2008

    “I like the fish-with-legs emblems that appear on various heads. I take that as subverting a Christian symbol to signify fish evolving into land animals, something to which creobots particularly object.”

    Or it could be an attempt to provoke the folowing thoughts:

    “Why have they got those fish symbols on their heads? That’s a Christian symbol, isn’t it? But they’re not Christians… Oh, wait, it’s got legs. Ah, it’s a Darwinist symbol! Very clever (chuckle)”

    …thereby subtly making the connection that Darwinism is just another religion.

    Sorry if this spoils anyone’s enjoyment, but the timing of its release, the content, the style and the production quality all add up to make me pretty sure this is viral advertising trying raise consciousness about Expelled’s claim that scientists are being sacked for their beliefs. It also tries to create certain negative associations with prominent atheists. That’s not to say it will succeed – just that it appears to have those aims.

    It’s entertaining, of course – it has to be so that people will enjoy it and help spread it on the internet. That’s the whole point. And I don’t think it matters whether the Expelled team are creative enough to put this together or not. I suspect they know enough about marketing and are well funded enough to commission someone else to do it for them.

    By the way, this is my first post here. Love the blog, PZ. You’re a star!

  134. #135 Mike
    March 30, 2008

    It was made by JibJab, commissioned by the producers and advertisers of Expelled, which won’t be admitted to because of the less wholesome elements. They’ll claim that our side made it, or let the suspicion that it was go unanswered. There’s a reason this advertising is highlighting the atheists. Myers comments in the movie, now being leaked by Egnor on the DI complaints page (pity PZ couldn’t have let us know earlier), is what is going to be focused on by the general public who, believe it or not, are very upset by educators stating that they want to convert children to atheism. This will be the clip from the movie that we’re going to see over and over again, along with the JibJab video, and its going to produce “teach the controversy” legislation, that will pass handlily, across the country. This is what will happen if you folks continue with the religion vs science framing. It may already be too late.

  135. #136 Pieter Kok
    March 30, 2008

    Buck (#315) may be onto something. A video like this needs a widely read blog like Pharyngula to spread it over the net. I suspect PZ was tipped off by the makers, but was asked not to reveal their identity.

  136. #137 Ryan Cunningham
    March 30, 2008

    People, the video is pro-evolution. “The Machine” in the song is SCIENCE. Dawkins, PZ, Darwin, etc. helped build the machine, but IT does the expelling.

  137. #138 Julie K
    March 30, 2008

    That was my take – the machine is the scientific method and it expels the ‘so-called scientists’ and rejects the ‘quaint, though ludicrous, notions of the origin of life.’

    The lyrics are pro-science and the rap imagery screams the message that science and scientists are cool and successful.

    As Darwin in the video says “If you don’t know me you don’t know dick!”

    (And upon watching the hi-res version, I think it is an octopus and not a squid on PZ’s hat. I still want one.)

  138. #139 gmm
    March 30, 2008

    Is the 5 minutes to midnite a reference to the urgency of understanding of science and a shot at the rapturists?

  139. #140 malatesta
    March 30, 2008

    So Democritus is holding a cat, while Aristotle is holding a turtle – is the allusion to Schroedinger and Zeno?

  140. #141 themadlolscientist
    March 30, 2008

    The Machine is actually a cyber-Mike Wazowski.

  141. #142 physicsphilosopher
    March 30, 2008

    I’ve read most of the comments posted, so I don’t know if this has been addressed yet. In the line about Democritus and Aristotle the images come from the painting, ‘The School of Athens,’ but the images are of Aristotle first and then Plato, not Democritus and Aristotle. In the painting, it’s Plato that is pointing at the sky, hence, in the video it’s Plato that gets booted into the well, not Aristotle. It’s minor, but I thought that someone on this board with more knowledge of ancient philosophy than I have may be interested. If you want to see the painting (it’s a work of pure genius encompassing the great philosophers/scientists of Raphael’s time) and all the players involved, check out the following link: http://agutie.homestead.com/FiLEs/school_athens_map.html

  142. #143 J Myers
    March 30, 2008

    Any clew [sic] about the two scientists at the beginning (“Little Tool” and “Bill”?)
    They appear to be styled after the guys from the JibJab logo.

  143. #144 trimtab
    March 30, 2008

    The first few seconds have just now caught my attention.

    I find the rotating logo just hysterical: “Ministry of Science Propaganda,” in a cyrillic-looking font and accentuated “o” (with a few flipped characters). Also the antiquated men-in-black, (Soviet style?). Really, the only people who don’t know that the words “science” and “propaganda” cannot go together are CREATIns, IDiots, and cdesign proponentsists. Oh, and the Bush administration.

    The first two elements of the title smack of paranoia, reminiscent of totalitarian, iron-curtain regimes. However, the last part is just too funny.

    “Reporting idiocy isn’t really squealing”

    While snitching on your neighbours was encouraged in the former Soviet block (as is the case in any self-respecting totalitarian regime), the title seems to admit that there’s something tacitly wrong with this practice. (You would never get such an admission from a totalitarian power, would you?) However, when applied to idiocy (read “IDiocy”), it’s ok. How direct a criticism of ID to you need in order to know that this film is pro science?

    This also smacks of science’s answer to Expelled’s criticism regarding censorship: while intolerance is not acceptable, applying science to combat IDiocy is actually quite ok, because it’s not a form of intolerance. Science can not be reduced to a form of religion/dogma/fundamentalism…

    As to the lyrics:

    kathryn in california #295, I’ve settled on this one (see below). Sounds more like a “more” than a “my”, and more like a “than” than a “per”. Hope you hear the same.

    MC Escher # 304, correction noted (see below). However, regarding “Holla”, I thought the backup voices are merely echoing “Allah”. Not sure on that one.

    The title of the file contains “DickyD”, so maybe I should replace “Dickie D” with it.

    The latest corrections, minus what I’m not sure or disagree about, are below (comments about, and corrections to, these auditory hallucinations welcome):

    ——————————-
    Hello, is this on?
    Can I get some more hydrogen in my test tube, please?

    My name is D to the I to C to the K,
    yeah I’m the Dickie D, I gots my PhD
    and comin’ your way on the Youtube, to bust your world view,
    so just listen to me and don’t you argue.

    You see, this battle’s been ragin’ since Zeus was on the bottle,
    ‘tween Science like Democritus and Faith like Aristotle,
    ?who said the mover was unmovin’ like some magic trick,
    but that’s no good logic, my posse is far too quick for this religious sthick.

    ‘Cuz science is the only way to know y’all,
    you stand with me y’all, or you can fall y’all,
    so go ahead and take your pick…

    ES: Yeah you tell him Rick …?
    Darwin : ‘Cuz if you don’t know me …
    RD: YOU DON’T KNOW DICK!

    Chorus: Yo he’s the Dick to the Dawk to the PhD,
    ?he’s smarter than you, he’s got a science degree!?
    Dick to the Dawk to the PhD,?
    he’s smarter than you, he’s got a science degree!

    SH: On the shoulders of midgets we built up this machine,?
    DD: YEAH!
    RD: Science silenced that watchdog wingnut Paley?
    growing stronger and harder almost daily,
    storming Wilber?by?force as we framed the discourse
    that faith and science are split in schismatic divorce.

    Then Darwin took to the seas to see what no one had seen,
    and ever since then we’ve been increasingly keen,
    they may never adore us, but they’ll no longer ignore us,
    give it to ‘em PZ hit these ?BLEEP? with the chorus!

    Chorus: Yo he’s the Dick to the Dawk to the PhD,
    ?he’s smarter than you, he’s got a science degree!
    ?Dick to the Dawk to the PhD,?
    he’s still smarter than you, he studied biology!

    ?Then there was Darrow,
    dukin’ it out with the straight and the narrow,?
    a ragin’ bull in the ring, he did his thing,
    and took it on the chin like he was Bobby De Niro.
    We might have lost at Scopes, beaten down by the dopes,
    and the stooges of popes, but in losin’ we coped,
    becomin’ more than we hoped,
    creationists slipped on the soap of their own slippery slope.

    What was impossible, improbable, is now wholly unstoppable untoppleable,
    the Dick Dawk’ll roll up as you creationists foldup,
    you haters talkin’ bull, don’t you know that this Dick is un-?BLEEP?-frickin’ blockable?

    Chorus: Yo he’s the Dick to the Dawk to the phd,?
    he’s smarter than you, he’s got a science degree!?
    Dick to the Dawk to the PhD,?
    he’s still smarter than you, he studied biology!

    Now the machine of our making, sees culture ripe for the taking,
    ‘cuz I’m the rappinest, rabidest atheist who,
    unlike the Catholic, the Muslim or even the Jew,
    believes that no God but science could ever be true,
    hell, if I was dyslexic I’d even hate “dog” too.

    Time to open your eyes, get yourself wise,
    the age of sciences will rise to be religion’s demise,
    and while you churchies all cry, shouting ‘why God oh why,’
    I’ll still be poppin’ my collar, earning more dollars than Allah.
    Allah!
    Darwin: Yes well I’ve told you.

    Chorus: Yo he’s the Dick to the Dawk to the phd,
    ?he’s smarter than you, he’s got a science degree!?
    Dick to the Dawk to the phd,
    ?he’s still smarter than you, he studied biology!

    Chorus: Dick to the Dawk to the phd,
    ?he’s smarter than you, he’s got a science degree!?
    Dick to the Dawk to the phd,?
    he’s still smarter than you, he studied biology!

  144. #145 Sastra
    March 30, 2008

    Russell Blackford #305 wrote

    It was made, says I, by satirists with a South Park kind of sensibility (but not necessarily the South Park folks themselves). I.e., by people who would think that, in the end, Dawkins, etc., are probably right on the facts about evolution (and maybe even atheism) but are nonetheless obnoxiously arrogant, self-congratulatory, insensitive, ruthless, materialist, etc., etc.

    This sounds like a pretty good call — a bit of what Dawkins calls “atheist buttery.” I’m an atheist/evolutionist too, BUT … you guys are still condescending snots.

    It seems to work best viewed as a pro-evolution attack on the New Atheists and their ‘scientism.’

    On the other hand, lines like this — “they may never adore us, but they’ll no longer ignore us” — do sound a bit like a nod to the power of being outspoken. If it’s an attack, it’s a friendly attack. And, frankly, I can’t see any creationist writing that line. There’s no way they want to show atheist-evolutionists as hitherto downtrodden, but finally speaking up, even for a moment. That’s how they’re trying to portray themselves!

  145. #146 Ichthyic
    March 30, 2008

    …even structurally, it attacks how the creationists portray things.

    how many times have you heard the creobots accuse PZ of essentially being “Dawkins’ chorus”?

  146. #147 J Myers
    March 30, 2008

    trimtab, Nice work. A few minor corrections:

    - “not good logic” (not “no good logic”)
    - “my posse’s” (not “my posse is”)
    - “shtick” (not “sthick”)
    - 1st chorus starts with “yeah”; others start with “yo”

    I’m not sure about the “Allah/holla” part; didn’t even notice that at first–it’s indiscernible in the reverb, whatever it is, though I’d guess it’s “holla” for reasons MC Escher provides. At the same point, SH and PZ say one word each, to which CD replies “Yes, well I’ve told you,” but I can’t make those out…. SH: you’re? pure? PZ: what?

  147. #148 amk
    March 30, 2008

    It seems to me that the film acknowledges the alleged arrogance of the “new atheist” – and celebrates it, as if it were saying that even if “new atheists” weren’t like that they should be. Why be shy about being right?

  148. #149 amk
    March 30, 2008

    Shorter DickyD: Science. It works, bitches.

    Oh, and PZ seems to be wearing a bandanna, not a hat.

  149. #150 Sastra
    March 30, 2008

    Ichythic #329 wrote:

    the whole thing is poking fun at how the CREATIONISTS mislabel Dawkins et. al. as “obnoxiously arrogant, self-congratulatory, insensitive, ruthless, materialist, etc., etc.”.

    Which only works as humor if it’s quite clear that Dawkins is not “obnoxiously arrogant, self-congratulatory, insensitive, ruthless, materialist, etc. etc.”

    I’m afraid that’s clear only to us (I mean not just you and me, of course, but the so-called New Atheist fan base in general.) Dawkins et al are attacked on a regular basis by other atheists, humanists, secularists, liberal religion evolutionists and so forth on the twin charges of scientism and rudeness.

    Take Matthew Nisbet (not literally.) When it gets right down to it, he’s on our side with evolution. He’s one of the Good Guys. He’s a friend. And he hates us. Well, not you and me, personally (I assume), but the whole Dawkins/PZ chorus. Do you think he would say the creationists are “mislabeling” Dawkins et. al?

    I’ll answer my own question. No. And he’s far from alone. Many atheists appear to be playing The-GOOD- Kind-of-Atheist shtick for all it’s worth. A few of these reviewers for The God Delusion sound like they either didn’t read the book, or they read a different one than me. Same situation as me breathing a secret sigh of relief that PZ’s interview in the movie was so tame, and Nisbet evidently letting it work him into a frenzy of fury so blind he didn’t know or care that telling PZ to “just shut up shut up god damn you” was really not the best way to “frame” the “expelled from Expelled” incident.

    You could be right. I can read the video as pure satire of creationism, a in-your-face depiction of the way they think atheists are. But I still think Russell’s got it.

    Will be interesting to see if we ever get a reveal and explication.

  150. #151 MikeM
    March 30, 2008

    I’m waaaaay late to the party (can’t stream video at work, doncha know…), and I have to voice my opinion.

    Awesome. Really well done.

    Youtube needs its on version of the Golden Globes.

  151. #152 themadlolscientist
    March 30, 2008

    Is the 5 minutes to midnite a reference to the urgency of understanding of science and a shot at the rapturists?

    It reminds me of the famous Doomsday Clock from the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists:

    The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists’ Doomsday Clock conveys how close humanity is to catastrophic destruction–the figurative midnight–and monitors the means humankind could use to obliterate itself. First and foremost, these include nuclear weapons, but they also encompass climate-changing technologies and new developments in the life sciences and nanotechnology that could inflict irrevocable harm.

    During the Cold War, the time on the clock was based only on the likelihood of nuclear war. When I was a kid, it was a big deal every time they reset the clock. Scared the hell out of me. I don’t know when they started including the other factors, but I don’t think they’ve started factoring in the Second Coming. :-)

    Right now, the clock is set at 5 minutes to midnight. I don’t know whether that’s a coincidence or not.

  152. #153 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 30, 2008

    Hmmm. Wilhelm scream. There, that’s better.

    Ah, thanks.

    It was made by JibJab, commissioned by the producers and advertisers of Expelled

    I am appalled at this slander of JibJab. Have you seen their videos about Fearless Flightsuit?

    I am also appalled at your complete lack of humor.

  153. #154 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 30, 2008

    Hmmm. Wilhelm scream. There, that’s better.

    Ah, thanks.

    It was made by JibJab, commissioned by the producers and advertisers of Expelled

    I am appalled at this slander of JibJab. Have you seen their videos about Fearless Flightsuit?

    I am also appalled at your complete lack of humor.

  154. #155 Michael X
    March 30, 2008

    This whole thread isn’t an insight into the creators ability to utilize irony and satire. It’s an insight into the simple ignorance a lot of science minded people have for hip hop culture. There’s no value judgement there, just a clear point to be made that then makes sense of the dick waving bravado that is being confused for the creator “commenting” on the characters of the scientists in question. The gold chains arn’t about money, they’re just what’s worn. It’s simply playing the part and the joke is having all these intellectuals dressed up as G’s. The arrogance, and in-your-face aspect isn’t directed at Dawkins et al, but instead is provided by hip hop itself, just like the bling is.

    This whole thing simply takes the issue and transports it into the hip hop culture, which is far from similar, and thus, the joke. I guess we shouldn’t be too surprised then that a good number of advanced degree intellectuals are having trouble relating.

    But hey… I could be wrong.

  155. #156 MAJeff, OM
    March 30, 2008

    MichaelX@338,

    EXACTLY!!!! This is a great play on the bravado of popular rap (I’m going to avoid the hip hop moniker because a lot of folks make a distinction–and I really like progressive political hip hop)

    After I posted about Hitch needing a 40 instead of a blunt, what popped into my head is that, given what popular rap has become, it should be a bottle of Courvoisier.

  156. #157 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 30, 2008

    Or it could be an attempt to provoke the folowing thoughts:

    “Why have they got those fish symbols on their heads? That’s a Christian symbol, isn’t it? But they’re not Christians… Oh, wait, it’s got legs. Ah, it’s a Darwinist symbol! Very clever (chuckle)”

    Look, it’s satire. It answers the question “if ‘Darwinism’ really were a religion like the silly cdesign proponentsists claim, what would it really look like”?

    Therefore the symbols all over the place (including the extra-large $ necklaces), the puppy-kicking, the “he’s smarter than you” chorus, and the machine that expels cdesign proponentsists left and right.

    Why do some people just not get it? Do you have that little experience with satire?

  157. #158 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 30, 2008

    Or it could be an attempt to provoke the folowing thoughts:

    “Why have they got those fish symbols on their heads? That’s a Christian symbol, isn’t it? But they’re not Christians… Oh, wait, it’s got legs. Ah, it’s a Darwinist symbol! Very clever (chuckle)”

    Look, it’s satire. It answers the question “if ‘Darwinism’ really were a religion like the silly cdesign proponentsists claim, what would it really look like”?

    Therefore the symbols all over the place (including the extra-large $ necklaces), the puppy-kicking, the “he’s smarter than you” chorus, and the machine that expels cdesign proponentsists left and right.

    Why do some people just not get it? Do you have that little experience with satire?

  158. #159 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 30, 2008

    The gold chains arn’t about money, they’re just what’s worn. It’s simply playing the part and the joke is having all these intellectuals dressed up as G’s. The arrogance, and in-your-face aspect isn’t directed at Dawkins et al, but instead is provided by hip hop itself, just like the bling is.

    No. The ridiculously large $ chains are about money — about the ridiculous IDology that scientists participate in the Darwinist conspiracy for money! It’s making fun of the IDologists! Eminem is chosen because he takes arrogance and carries it all the way to ridiculosity, like how this video takes the supposed arrogance evilutionists have according to the IDology and carries it all the way to ridiculosity!

    And here I thought I was the one with too many Asperger symptoms!!! [v?a???????]!!!

    (I hope this displays correctly. Outside the IPA my voiceless scream cannot be written.)

  159. #160 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 30, 2008

    The gold chains arn’t about money, they’re just what’s worn. It’s simply playing the part and the joke is having all these intellectuals dressed up as G’s. The arrogance, and in-your-face aspect isn’t directed at Dawkins et al, but instead is provided by hip hop itself, just like the bling is.

    No. The ridiculously large $ chains are about money — about the ridiculous IDology that scientists participate in the Darwinist conspiracy for money! It’s making fun of the IDologists! Eminem is chosen because he takes arrogance and carries it all the way to ridiculosity, like how this video takes the supposed arrogance evilutionists have according to the IDology and carries it all the way to ridiculosity!

    And here I thought I was the one with too many Asperger symptoms!!! [v?a???????]!!!

    (I hope this displays correctly. Outside the IPA my voiceless scream cannot be written.)

  160. #161 Owlmirror
    March 30, 2008

    hence, in the video it’s Plato that gets booted into the well,

    And well he deserves it. Plato was probably one of the first woo-spreaders around.

  161. #162 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 30, 2008

    And well he deserves it. Plato was probably one of the first woo-spreaders around.

    Exactly.

  162. #163 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 30, 2008

    And well he deserves it. Plato was probably one of the first woo-spreaders around.

    Exactly.

  163. #164 MC Escher
    March 30, 2008

    The gold chains arn’t about money, they’re just what’s worn. It’s simply playing the part and the joke is having all these intellectuals dressed up as G’s. The arrogance, and in-your-face aspect isn’t directed at Dawkins et al, but instead is provided by hip hop itself, just like the bling is.

    Can’t it be both Micheal X? We are talking about ‘mirrored reverse-triple-satire’ here afterall.

    #331 J. Myers- the line of Darwin’s at the end, “Yes, but I’ve told you” sounds like an actual a snippet from the movie- at least to my ears as it matches none of the other voices.

  164. #165 wamba
    March 30, 2008

    The scene in which “Boris” has his colleague “expelled” is ironic, considering that Soviet biological science was crippled in the mid-20th century by pseudo-scientists wielding political power. It was not “Darwinists,” but Lysenkoists who did the damage, which resulted in the starvation of multitudes.

  165. #166 Reginald Selkirk
    March 30, 2008

    It seems to me that the film acknowledges the alleged arrogance of the “new atheist” – and celebrates it…

    The video maker seems to be conflating the evo vs. creo fight with the atheist vs. theist fight. Harris and Hitchens have not been prominent faces in the evo vs. creo wars. Where is Ken Miller? Where is any theist evolutionist?

  166. #167 Reginald Selkirk
    March 30, 2008

    Oh my dog, that kicks ass! Someone must have studied biology!

    Don’t know what you’re talking about; there is no scientific content in the video. The video maker is familiar with some faces known only within the evo wars, but confuses them (deliberately?) with the new atheists. Dawkins only claim to authority in the video is that, scarecrow-like, he possesses a piece of paper proclaiming that he has a diploma. (According to Wikipedia, Dawkins actually possesses an MA, a D.Phil and a D.Sc., but not a Ph.D.) As noted by others, the historical figures mentioned are not accurately portrayed either. Why mention the Scopes trial but not Edwards v. Aguillard or Kitzmiller v. DASD?

    Musically and visually, it displays a lot of talent, but it does not display a detailed and accurate knowledge of the subject matter.

  167. #168 Michael X
    March 30, 2008

    Well, it could be triple-reverse-ironic-satire. But occam’s razor just seems to point to the fact that some guys had the idea of making a rap about this whole idiotic Expelled drama and like the gag of putting Dawkins et al in rap paraphernalia. And I like the idea too. I found it hilarious.

    So while the chains represent money in the simple sense of having it, which is a rap meme, it is emphatically not to be viewed as some metaphorical statement on the place of money are regards scientists, cdesign proponentists, or whatever else, which is what I meant about the chains not being about “money” in any conscious sense. I should have been clearer. It’s simply part of “dressing the part”. This whole thing is really much simpler than it’s being made to be, and the glorious, simple humor of it is being lost by taking it down rabbit trails.

    And David, be gentle with my satire meter. It’s a little overloaded at the moment.

  168. #169 J Myers
    March 30, 2008

    sounds like an actual a snippet from the movie
    … from Expelled? Why do you think that? Wherever it’s from originally, in this video Darwin seems to be offering it as a response to whatever Harris and PZ are saying – any ideas?

  169. #170 George Smiley
    March 30, 2008

    I harbor two suspicions. First: at least some of the commentors claiming that this is a viral vid are themselves paid or volunteer cdesignp’ist astroturfers. Second, that most of those who fit the first description but not the second are Seriously Humor-Impaired.

  170. #171 386sx
    March 30, 2008

    Dawkins actually possesses an MA, a D.Phil and a D.Sc., but not a Ph.D.

    A D.Phil is the same thing as a Ph.D, I believe.

  171. #172 Michael X
    March 30, 2008

    MAJeff,
    I agree that musically the distinction needs to be made, as a lot of quality hip hop (and rap) is being made, though popular rap/hop is diluting the overall quality of both. But that’s just me. As for Hitch, if they didn’t have Courvoisier, maybe they could have used Cristal? Though, I’m sure Hitch would rather just go lowbrow and drink Hennessy… After that, my knowledge of high-class rap liquor fails me. Though I gotta admit, when I saw Dr. Dre and Pharrell do a Coors Light commercial I thought the world was about to turn on it’s head.

  172. #173 386sx
    March 30, 2008

    According to Wikipedia, Dawkins actually possesses an MA, a D.Phil and a D.Sc., but not a Ph.D.

    http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2409,Beware-the-Believers,RandomSlice,page5#152142

    “3. There’s no difference between D.Phil and Ph.D.
    Oxford and Cambridge adopted different abbreviations for the Latin form of “Doctor of Philosophy”. The rest of the world, for some reason follows the Cambridge form, Ph.D. (except Sussex, Buckingham and perhaps York although I am not sure about that). It would simplify matters if Oxford were to come into line with the rest of the world, but I don’t see it happening any time soon. There is absolutely no sense in which a D.Phil is superior to a Ph.D. The higher doctorate of science is the D.Sc (Oxford) or Sc.D (Cambridge).” –Richard Dawkins, famous celebrity rapper. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaGgpGLxLQw

  173. #174 Mike D
    March 30, 2008

    Who is in the audience?

    I’m pretty sure the bald guy in the front row is Kevin Miller, but I haven’t been able to place the others. Anyone recognize any of the shocked folks in the audience?

  174. #175 Sastra
    March 30, 2008

    Reginald Selkirk #356 wrote:

    That’s not true. One of them rhymes better.
    Dick to the Dawk to the Dsc

    Oh my, you’re right.

    I really don’t know if the minor genius behind this video has been reading any of these comments — and if he has been, I’m not sure if he’s been laughing, or sneering, or shaking his head in annoyance or confusion or approval — but I do know one thing. If he read that, he just went “damn.”

    Why? Because “Dick to the Dawk to the Dsc” does sound better than “Dick to the Dawk to the Phd.”

    Of course, it wouldn’t have been as clear to the American audience. So if you are reading this, Anonymous Video Maker, it’s okay. It’s better you did it the way you did. Don’t feel bad.

  175. #176 Thanny
    March 30, 2008

    #348:

    Scientific content? It’s about science as force in history, not any particular set of nuts and bolts from its practice.

    Consider the historical faceoffs referred to:

    Democritus vs. Aristotle
    David Hume vs. William Paley
    T.H. Huxley vs. Samuel Wilberforce
    Clarence Darrow vs. William Jennings Bryan

    This is the work of a very well-informed person. He/she even knew the “on the shoulders of dwarfs” line (changed to “midgets” in the video) that Sam Harris uses to describe Western Civilization’s level of progress in contemplative thought, his pet topic.

    Finally, the cephalopod on PZ’s hat is definitely an octopus – it’s crystal clear in the high-resolution version you can get via the torrent linked to several times in the comments here.

  176. #177 Gordy
    March 30, 2008

    David Marjanovi? wrote: “Look, it’s satire. It answers the question “if ‘Darwinism’ really were a religion like the silly cdesign proponentsists claim, what would it really look like”?”
    OK, so why not use the red A? Why come up with a corruption of a Christian symbol? I think it’s because they specifically wanted that link between the symbol and religion.

    David Marjanovi? wrote: “Why do some people just not get it? Do you have that little experience with satire?”
    I do get it. Yes, it is satire and very clever satire at that. As I said above, it has to be entertaining in order that people will spread it around the internet. That is the nature of viral advertising. Why do you just not get that? :)
    I’m not trying to debate whether or not it’s funny, just the intent behind it.

    George Smiley wrote: “I harbor two suspicions. First: at least some of the commentors claiming that this is a viral vid are themselves paid or volunteer cdesignp’ist astroturfers. Second, that most of those who fit the first description but not the second are Seriously Humor-Impaired.”
    Well, I am an atheist and have no time for ID. Not quite sure why I should be humour-impaired, unless you think it’s impossible to find something funny and at the same time see a hostile intent behind it.
    You don’t have to take my word for it. Just look at the spin they put on the expelled from Expelled incident. Now think about how they could try to use this video and the reaction to it. I’m not going to speculate on here lest I end up doing their work for them, but I can think of a few choice ways that a cynical media manipulator could spin all this to make atheists look bad. We’ll see if it actually happens.
    I realise I’m swimming against the tide here and I admit I could be wrong, but I am sincerely trying to help.

  177. #178 J Myers
    March 30, 2008

    Why come up with a corruption of a Christian symbol?
    Gordy, that legged fish is mainstream. It is known much more widely than the scarlet A, pink unicorn, atomic A, etc. It’s been around for years, and I see it on several cars on my drive to work, on several more in the parking lot at my office… it’s everywhere (excluding various benighted backwaters, no doubt). There are many creative elements in that video, but the evolving fish is not one of them.

  178. #179 Physicalist
    March 30, 2008

    “Why come up with a corruption of a Christian symbol?”

    They didn’t “come up” with the Darwin Fish, it’s been around for well over a decade. I had one on my car in the early 90s, and I’d guess it had been around for many years before that.

  179. #180 Ichthyic
    March 30, 2008

    “Why come up with a corruption of a Christian symbol?”

    a better question:

    why did Christians corrupt a perfectly good pagan symbol?

    http://altreligion.about.com/library/glossary/symbols/bldefsvesica.htm

  180. #181 Ichthyic
    March 30, 2008

    Why do some people just not get it? Do you have that little experience with satire?

    I kept thinking the same thing.

    The purpose and theme of the vid seemed rather obvious to me.

    I mean, gold dollar sign necklaces??

    c’mon, people. They are obviously paroding the image of scientists the creationists themselves attempt to portray.

    this a 100% pro science, anti-idiot parody.

  181. #182 Physicalist
    March 30, 2008

    If we didn’t have the evidence of the singing and the dancing to speak for the author being male, I’d guess that it would be the only non-photoshopped gasp in the audience 18 seconds in. But she’s a young woman (perhaps a friend of the author?). I would like to know whose faces those are; I’d be surprised if they were random images (some school board, or something?).

  182. #183 Ichthyic
    March 31, 2008

    Take Matthew Nisbet (not literally.)

    oh, I think there a few place I’d like to take young Matty too. A congregation of Phelpsians comes to mind. I think I would like to leave him with them for a couple of weeks; give him a real education.

  183. #184 Ichthyic
    March 31, 2008

    for people who like a “clearer” message…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_TH-eUUkbA&feature=related

  184. #185 tintenfisch
    March 31, 2008

    I just checked out Uncommon Descent. They’re claiming this video as a win for their side and they’re tickled pink that we just can’t see that this is a brilliant, creationist, anti-evolution masterpiece

    Doesn’t look like they have any better idea who made this than we do, but seems like their consensus is that this is from the Expelled team.

    I’m still on the fence. I could see this as going either way.

  185. #186 James F
    March 31, 2008

    But then why would they support it? I thought ID wasn’t creationism…oh, wait, never mind.

  186. #187 Squiddhartha
    March 31, 2008

    Don’t forget, by the tenet that “any publicity is good publicity” (which is why PZ’s expulsion and the hoopla surrounding it were “bad for science,” remember?), even if this was made to mock science, it’s a win for the “Darwinists”!

    It’s face time for atheists and scientists — the only creationists that appear are getting kicked around. No mention of Behe, Dembski, Egnor…

  187. #188 Ichthyic
    March 31, 2008

    This thread still going on 300 posts after Robert Maynard? What for?

    because he took it as an attack instead of as parody?

    IOW, he was wrong.

  188. #189 Gordy
    March 31, 2008

    Good question, Grammar RWA. I’d love to know why it’s so obvious to some people and not at all to others.

  189. #190 Grammar RWA
    March 31, 2008

    Oh well. It’s not as blatant as it could be, and of course we’re all using different measurements.

  190. #191 Michael X
    March 31, 2008

    Ouch tintenfisch,
    I don’t often subject myself to Uh Duh, but damn if that isn’t some dim commentary. I saved that particular post for whenever they find egg on their face and try to erase it. I’m actually looking forward to it. I may have to start a blog just to show it off.

  191. #192 nameinuse
    March 31, 2008

    For what it’s worth, the rapper sounds a lot like MC 900 ft Jesus from back in the day.

  192. #193 Reginald Selkirk
    March 31, 2008

    I just checked out Uncommon Descent. They’re claiming this video as a win for their side and they’re tickled pink that we just can’t see that this is a brilliant, creationist, anti-evolution masterpiece…

    What’s the last development in the battle that the Creationists did not declare as a win? Seriously, if they had a functional, well-calibrated sense of judgment, they wouldn’t be creationists.

  193. #194 Reginald Selkirk
    March 31, 2008

    If it turns out that this is actually the work of the Expelled production team…

    I don’t recall anyone suggesting that it was done by the Expelled! team themselves, only that they commissioned it. Whoever did this had far more talent than Mark Mathis and Ben Stein put together.

  194. #195 Ken Cope
    March 31, 2008

    Whoever did this had far more talent than Mark Mathis and Ben Stein put together.

    That’s a very low bar. That reduces the number of potential authors to pretty much everybody else.

  195. #196 snead
    March 31, 2008

    This is the most fun thread I’ve lurked in a long time.

    I posted about this at Kos last night and somebody suggested it might be Jamie Kennedy, whom I’d never heard of, but if you Google him you can see he’s about the same size, shape, and pastiness of the bodies in the video.

  196. #197 pedlar
    March 31, 2008

    Getting late … but everyone else and their dog has had a go …

    When I find myself (partially) disagreeing with, among others, the smartest (David M) and the wisest (Sastra) of the regulars here then something really weird is going on … but for goodness sake people stop being so damn clever.

    This is not made by you, its made by a rap artist, and a damn good one at that. So stop looking at it thru your eyes, your wise scientist eyes.

    Michael X @ 338 has got it dead right. Why? Because of all of us he’s got the nearest thing to ‘rap artist’ eyes. Read it again, and learn.

    This whole thread isn’t an insight into the creators ability to utilize irony and satire. It’s an insight into the simple ignorance a lot of science minded people have for hip hop culture. There’s no value judgement there, just a clear point to be made that then makes sense of the dick waving bravado that is being confused for the creator “commenting” on the characters of the scientists in question. The gold chains arn’t about money, they’re just what’s worn. It’s simply playing the part and the joke is having all these intellectuals dressed up as G’s. The arrogance, and in-your-face aspect isn’t directed at Dawkins et al, but instead is provided by hip hop itself, just like the bling is.

    Oh, and it’s (bleeping) hilarious.

  197. #198 Dude
    March 31, 2008

    I’m going with MC Frontalot as the author of the video.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nigRT2KmCE

  198. #199 Aspentroll
    March 31, 2008

    That was very well done.
    I really don’t know which side would be responsible for this. It seemed to be mocking Dawkins. But then,
    a whole lot of science was needed just to produce it,
    so since the creationists
    use bad science, mostly,
    I kinda doubt it was them. Besides that, don’t all rappers go to Hell?

  199. #200 Robster, FCD
    March 31, 2008

    It wouldn’t surprise me if it was a pro-expelled video. Remember how PZ and RD’s interviews raised the hackles of the creationists, while we saw nothing wrong with them at all (except the quotemining, scare music, and nose pans)?

    My biggest reason for thinking this was not a pro-expelled movie is that it doesn’t appear on the expelled website. the best they have to offer is a crappy jibjab free ecard.

  200. #201 blf
    March 31, 2008

    J.Myers@325: “Clew” is an archaic spelling of “clue”. I prefer “clew” because it seems to better represent the sound of that word.

    I don’t know when “clue” replaced “clew” (or, indeed, if “clew” ever was the dominant spelling), but it was probably fairly recently (i.e., last c.100 years or so). Reason? The “clew” spelling was used by Arthur Conan Doyle in some of the Sherlock Holmes stories. (I do not know if or when he ever used “clue”.)

  201. #202 Spinoza
    March 31, 2008

    To the guy who asked who the hip-hop group/song is that is being referenced, it’s Naughty By Nature – O.P.P. from 1991… so uhh… yeah…

  202. #203 Paha Arkkitehti
    March 31, 2008

    For the JibJab speculation; they just (23 mins ago) commented on the film “well done!”, so they are not taking credit from this piece.

  203. #204 malatesta
    March 31, 2008

    @ #389

    I don’t think it’s MC Frontalot, but it is definitely somebody in the relatively tiny nerdcore scene.

  204. #205 Lago
    March 31, 2008

    Like I said above, I talked to someone who produces hip-hop and they said it sounds exactly like “Jamie Kennedy,” and also said that the guy in the T-shirt (The wife beater) looks identical to the way Kennedy dresses and his physical appearance. He said Jamie works with other people, so it would not be Jamie alone of he did it, but he said the main voice is near identical to him..

    I will try and see if I can get some video stuff from YouTube so you can compare…

  205. #206 Lago
    March 31, 2008

    Here is one by him…

  206. #207 Lago
    March 31, 2008
  207. #208 Ichthyic
    March 31, 2008

    Here is one by him…

    ?

  208. #209 Ferrous Patella
    March 31, 2008

    Lago!

    Link!

  209. #210 windy
    March 31, 2008
    Oh my dog, that kicks ass! Someone must have studied biology!

    Don’t know what you’re talking about; there is no scientific content in the video.

    Maybe you need to study more biology. ;)

  210. #211 Lago
    March 31, 2008

    I have no idea why I am having trouble posting links but here I try again. This was the first video:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goC2iRXywes

  211. #212 Ichthyic
    March 31, 2008

    I’m going with no on Kennedy being involved.

    the bobble-head style is similar, but the animations are much more complex (check the mouth movements) in the Kennedy vids.

    It is interesting that whoever did it hasn’t stepped up yet to claim it.

  212. #213 Lago
    March 31, 2008

    I did not even know about the bobble head but when I suggested Kennedy. I had someone who produces rap stuff listen to the original and dared him to name who might have done it, and he did not blink, and said this is Jamie Kennedy from Malibu’s most wanted. He is a comedian and rapper. The guys with him are often from other comedic groups like Mad TV.

    Here you can see the guy from the video is built very similar and dresses very similar to Jamie Kennedy, and Jamie has had several TV shows and has the access to animators galore…

  213. #214 Lago
    March 31, 2008
  214. #215 Carlie
    March 31, 2008

    I thought the clock was referring to the geologic time analogy with the beginning of the Cenozoic.

  215. #216 J Myers
    March 31, 2008

    blf, interesting, I did not know that, and I’ve read some of Arthur Conan Doyle’s Holmes books. Perhaps they had been edited to reflect our contemporary conventions… I have my linguistic and stylistic preferences as well–always use the Oxford comma, for instance–but holding to such lofty ideals, I find I only meet with disappointment. For instance, Dawkins omitted my cherished comma from The God Delusion. The heretic.

  216. #217 ATX
    March 31, 2008

    It’s certainly Jamie Kennedy…
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zg46D2Xs_00

  217. #218 386sx
    March 31, 2008

    They spelled Christopher Hitchens’s name wrong in the video desription. They spelled it like “Hitchins”. Must be the Expelled people!!

  218. #219 Fire Ant
    March 31, 2008

    The large ball of the machine looks like William Beebe’s Bathysphere………

  219. #220 Physicalist
    March 31, 2008

    Yep, you nailed it. Kennedy all right. Sure looks to me like the young woman in the Stu Stone vid is the same one as the non-photoshopped gasper eighteen seconds in. I’ll try to post the pic in a second . . .

  220. #221 Lago
    March 31, 2008

    I have posting that it was Jamie Kennedy for several days now…and no one believed me..

  221. #222 Lago
    March 31, 2008

    I also believe, as mentioned above, the D. Dennett body is played by Bobby Lee of Mad TV

  222. #223 Physicalist
    March 31, 2008

    Well, Lago, I believe you now. I tried to post up the pics at physicalist.blogspot.com.

    I’ll see if I can get a better grab of the young woman’s face in the 1984 vid. Do you know who she is? (And am I right to think that’s definitely her?)

  223. #224 Maybe
    March 31, 2008

    That’s not very compelling evidence, the girls look a little alike but I have no clue if it’s the same girl. And the voices don’t quite match up in my head. Could be him but I’d guess it’s someone pretty unknown.

  224. #225 Damian
    March 31, 2008

    I don’t know whether it is her, Physicalist, Lago, etc. She has totally different expressions on her face in the 1984 video, so it is hard to tell, but I can’t see enough similarity.

    I do think that you could well be right about who made the video, though. Nobody has logged in to the Jaime Kennedy youtube account for over 6 months.

  225. #226 Lago
    March 31, 2008

    Bobby lee is fat and out of shape and loves to show it off. He is from Mad TV. He is also friends with Jamie Kennedy and did a movie with him. Here is a video:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvUtdEvOEKY

    Now compare his body with D. Dennett’s from the video…

  226. #227 Physicalist
    March 31, 2008

    I’m not positive it’s the same young woman either, but it’s a pretty strong match. Exactly the same hair (which is perhaps surprising), same face structure. I wish there were a higher resolution version of the 1984 video.

    Lago, I’d be willing to bet that you’re right about Bobby Lee and Dennett’s body.

    Put all this together with the fact that we’ve got Kennedy with the high quality rap bobble-head theme and I think the case is very strong.

  227. #228 MAJeff, OM
    March 31, 2008

    the Bobby Lee thing makes a LOT of sense to me with the Eugenie Scott character playing with “her” tummy….

    Then again, I’m not really caring who made it…it’s just fun.

  228. #229 Lago
    March 31, 2008

    I know we all could be wrong, but, as a guitarist, I can tell many guitar plays at one note, so when I asked someone that produced rap, and he did not blink, I must respect his opinion. He did admit it could be someone trying to copy Jamie Kennedy, but it must be at least that.

    So, if I am right, I must actually Credit “Shiz Murder” for figuring it out…

  229. #230 noblecaboose
    April 1, 2008

    #389
    No, it’s definitely not Front. But he did write a VERY COOL song about the “Wedge Strategy” called Origin of the Species satirizing the point of view of creationists.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJjcyguR5bg
    (it’s hard to hear the lyrics in the song)

  230. #231 Dude
    April 1, 2008

    #425

    “Origin” is the reason I think Its MC Frontalot. The writing style is similar! Not to mention Frontalot is a tall, pasty white dude, kinda skinny but has the nerd-belly.

    But the Jamie Kennedy argument is running a close second.

    It will be interesting to see who made it, if anyone ever owns up to it.

  231. #232 The Droids You Are Looking For
    April 1, 2008

    That’s a no on Jamie Kennedy. And a no for Bobby Lee.

    Flattering as both guesses are. *eyeroll*

    You will find the ones you’re looking for here

  232. #233 Lago
    April 1, 2008

    Seems we have smoked someone out..

  233. #234 JCE
    April 1, 2008

    Ha! Called it! Ok, where do I send the beer?

  234. #235 JCE
    April 1, 2008

    though wondering why it isn’t on same youtube account as the original. Bother.

  235. #236 Torben
    April 1, 2008

    I don’t get it. “Expect us”? Is this linked to the anti-scientology crowd, Anonymous? Of course the date is close to April’s Fools Day, but still.

  236. #237 agg
    April 1, 2008

    I think this video has opened whole new untapped as of yet market!

  237. #238 Mike D
    April 1, 2008

    You can count on t-shirts with the slogan:

    “I’m smarter than you. I’ve got a science degree.”

  238. #239 bitbutter
    April 1, 2008

    @ Dude, post #425

    I thought it might be mc frontalot also, so i asked him. He says no.

  239. #240 Physicalist
    April 1, 2008

    Oh well, so much for my attempts to be a cyber-sleuth. I give up.

  240. #241 386sx
    April 1, 2008

    They spelled Christopher Hitchens’s name wrong in the video desription. They spelled it like “Hitchins”.

    Thank you mysterious person for correcting that! :P

  241. #242 Robster, FCD
    April 1, 2008

    If it were anonymous, take this as a good sign. The “God does not exist, prove me wrong” threads at *removed by scientology* would make make the religion discussions here look like tea time with the Queen. That anonymous is not invading here is a sign that those who are aware of sciblogs like it too much to give it cancer.

  242. #243 J Myers
    April 1, 2008
    They spelled Christopher Hitchens’s name wrong in the video desription. They spelled it like “Hitchins”.

    Thank you mysterious person for correcting that! :P

    I had noticed that misspelling as well; figured it was just a careless mistake. What’s interesting is that they appear to have fixed the spelling without logging into their youtube account–last login for randomslice was 2+ days ago.

  243. #244 Grammar RWA
    April 1, 2008

    though wondering why it isn’t on same youtube account as the original. Bother.

    Because it isn’t by the same people. The dancing in the second video is exactly the same as the first. They just cut out some scenes and blackened the background. It would be trivial to do, nothing like the work that went into the first video.

  244. #245 Paha Arkkitehti
    April 1, 2008

    “What’s interesting is that they appear to have fixed the spelling without logging into their youtube account–last login for randomslice was 2+ days ago.”

    Nothing weird here – I often have my browser open for many many days with single YouTube login and it counts “from the beginning”…

  245. #246 amk
    April 1, 2008

    I’m inclined to believe the ‘reveal’ as they use the uncensored audio track at the very end instead of “This Dick is un-*bleep*-frickin’-blockable.”
    Up thread there was a link to an uncensored version on Youtube that was taken down again quickly.

    I call bullshit on this “reveal”. Show me the bodies without the heads and I’ll believe it.

  246. #247 Monty
    April 1, 2008

    That was the funniest thing I have seen all week. People should do this sort of thing more often

  247. #248 Carlie
    April 1, 2008

    Damn it, droids, that’s the third time today!

    BTW, check out YouTube’s featured videos of the day.

  248. #249 Thomas S. Howard
    April 2, 2008

    Umm, sorry to throw water on the Jaime Kennedy theory, but the girl Physicalist has identified in Kennedy’s “1984″ clip is Maria Menounos. That clip is from the movie “Kickin’ It Old Skool”, and, well, she’s in it. Of course, it could still be him, but this doesn’t count as evidence one way or the other.

  249. #250 BathTub
    April 2, 2008

    That’s actually a cool little follow-up video, I’m inclined to believe it’s the same guys.

  250. #251 Torbjörn Larsson, OM
    April 2, 2008

    Seems my reply never made it out of spam filter limbo:

    Oh my dog, that kicks ass! Someone must have studied biology!

    Don’t know what you’re talking about; there is no scientific content in the video.

    I’m afraid you are reading too much into this. It was an attempt of joke based on the rap text.

  251. #252 Torbjörn Larsson, OM
    April 2, 2008

    Seems my reply never made it out of spam filter limbo:

    Oh my dog, that kicks ass! Someone must have studied biology!

    Don’t know what you’re talking about; there is no scientific content in the video.

    I’m afraid you are reading too much into this. It was an attempt of joke based on the rap text.

  252. #253 Torbjörn Larsson, OM
    April 2, 2008

    I’m inclined to believe the ‘reveal’ as they use the uncensored audio track

    I guess that isn’t conclusive in this age of the video, but I assume that is the whole point of this. OTOH it clashes with the concept of Rick Rolling as I understand it.

    Too bad, as the follow up while still intelligent is unfunnily dismissive of science (and possibly Rick Rolling). The original video projected this deceit humoristically onto creationist strawmen.

    Either it isn’t the same makers, or they got hurried as this is an exclusive reaction to ScienceBlogs discussion, or they reveal their own assumptions. (Or possibly it is a meta projection, as scientology style beliefs is another strawman. But that is too much overloading to be funny to me.)

    Happily it doesn’t detract from the original video at all! Now I’m looking forward to see the uncensored version of it. (Lacking that, piecing it together could be a nice project for a rainy day.)

  253. #254 Torbjörn Larsson, OM
    April 2, 2008

    I’m inclined to believe the ‘reveal’ as they use the uncensored audio track

    I guess that isn’t conclusive in this age of the video, but I assume that is the whole point of this. OTOH it clashes with the concept of Rick Rolling as I understand it.

    Too bad, as the follow up while still intelligent is unfunnily dismissive of science (and possibly Rick Rolling). The original video projected this deceit humoristically onto creationist strawmen.

    Either it isn’t the same makers, or they got hurried as this is an exclusive reaction to ScienceBlogs discussion, or they reveal their own assumptions. (Or possibly it is a meta projection, as scientology style beliefs is another strawman. But that is too much overloading to be funny to me.)

    Happily it doesn’t detract from the original video at all! Now I’m looking forward to see the uncensored version of it. (Lacking that, piecing it together could be a nice project for a rainy day.)

  254. #255 dahduh
    April 2, 2008

    Here’s something for you conspiracy theorists out there. Why precisely were the words “Reporting idiocy isn’t really _squealing_” (my emphasis) put up at the start of the video? Doesn’t this suggest that the authors are in some way related to an organization that is _supposed_ to be advancing the ID view, but decided to engage in a little active subversion? For example, perhaps some of the more intelligent people in a company commissioned for ‘Expelled’ decided to put in a bit of overtime…

    Of course the ‘idiocy’ is probably also play on IDiot.

  255. #256 andyo
    April 2, 2008

    Given that the genius who created this seems to be well informed, I wonder if there is any significance to her(? his? their?) listing an age of 107 in the YouTube profile:

    http://www.youtube.com/user/randomslice

    I can think of three reasons:

    1. It’s an arbitrary number. Move along.

    2. An anniversary of something 107 years(?) ago? (Any ideas what?)

    3. The combined ages of the creative team.

    And am I imagining it, or is there a face(? skull? fossil?) rotating in the center of the Ministry of Science Propaganda logo when the clip starts?

    Posted by: blf | April 1, 2008 2:29 PM

    Oh, you lowly humans, always seeing purpose where there is none. The 107 years is probably that the oldest year you can put as your birth year is 1900? I am also 107, (now 108 maybe) years old in my hi5 profile (not endorsing that craphole of hi5, I only signed up to be able to see my friends (as in people I actually know personally and care for) and of course, to mock Jesus publicly at the same time.

  256. #257 DingoDave
    April 2, 2008

    Posted by: nowoo #259
    “Did anyone else notice the Wilhelm scream at 1:39 as Aristotle falls down the well?”

    Thanks for your keen observation nowoo, I hadn’t noticed it before you pointed it out.

    As to the question about whether the video either promotes or opposes the scientific method; it looks to me as though it throws everything onto the table, and then lets the chips fall where they may, according to the pre-dispositions of the individual viewer. (sorry about the mixed metaphors)

    The inclusion of the ‘Wilhelm scream’ is simply icing on the cake.

    What a clever composition. Bravo!

  257. #258 DingoDave
    April 3, 2008

    If you liked that, then try this. ‘MC Hawking, A Breif History of Rhyme’

    http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/233937#

    and then click on ‘WATCH THIS MOVIE’, then ‘PLAY’.

  258. #259 DingoDave
    April 3, 2008

    Or listen this.
    ‘F*ck the Creatoionists’, which you can find here:

    http://www.dizzler.com/music/MC_Hawking/Fuck_The_Creationists

  259. #260 DingoDave
    April 3, 2008

    Edit #456

    Or listen to this.
    ‘F*ck the Creationists’, which you can find here:

    http://www.dizzler.com/music/MC_Hawking/Fuck_The_Creationists

    Sorry. So many typos, so little time.

  260. #261 Tim
    April 3, 2008

    Pure genius!
    We’re not worthy!
    We’re not worthy!
    We’re not worthy!

  261. #262 Nick
    April 3, 2008

    i don’t know how some of yall are missing it but it is definately a pro-Expelled piece, mocking the perceived arrogance and agressiveness of Dawkins and company (depicting that the academic science community has become a machine-like institution trying to silence dissedents). “idiocy isn’t squeeling” probably means that ID believers are not squeeling as they are confronted with the new atheists. it says “ministry of science propaganda” in the beginning – which would not be in support of atheism. i think there is a skull in the upper portion of the globe and maybe something in the middle. i think the rapper may be the christian hip-hop artist KJ-52. the voice sounds like his, has a similar style, and is hilarious like he always is with his music. he probably teamed up with a bunch of young people in support of Expelled.

  262. #263 lightning
    April 3, 2008

    their target audience is you. they want you to see the movie so that you understand the other side of the debate. this debate has not been won. that’s why it has been going on so long, as the video shows.

  263. #264 LOLZ At tha BRITEZ
    April 3, 2008

    Y’all been viral videoed by the EXPELLED crew!

    Amazing how all these “brights” missed that part…
    …and the Dennet Drunk reference
    …and the sarcasm in the “he’s smarter than you”
    …and the questioning of AS.

  264. #265 amk
    April 4, 2008

    So, I don’t know if anyone has pointed this out yet, but on the Expelled website (I won’t link to it) there is a link to a little jib-jab style video of the same cut-out-heads-on-bodies doing the can-can.

    On Vox Day’s blog (I won’t link that either), the commenters point this out as evidence “the machine” video was created by (or commissioned by) the Expelled group. Are they right?

    What a crock. One minute’s research reveals that this is a pre-packaged JibJab “sendable” clip designed to be modified by the end user. It is not custom made for Expelled. Expelled haven’t even hosted it properly – wrong MIME type.

    http://www.jibjab.com/sendables/247/Starring_You/The_Can_Can

    Don’t be concerned about linking. The commenting software here automatically adds the property rel=”nofollow” to links, so Googlebot will completely ignore them, including for page ranking purposes.

  265. #266 Lilith
    April 6, 2008

    No doubt this was created to make fun of evolutionists. Isn’t it amazing how, occasionally, the IDers can be intentionally funny? How exciting! We may be witnessing actual genetic drift within the ID camp!

  266. #267 Chrys
    April 6, 2008

    “Science silenced that watchdog wingnut Paley”

    “We might have lost at Scopes, beaten down by the dopes,
    and the stooges of popes, but in losin’ we coped,
    becomin’ more than we hoped,
    creationists slipped on the soap of their own slippery slope”

    “while you churchies all cry, shouting ‘why God oh why,’”

    Wingnut, dopes, stooges of popes, and churchies?
    If this was made by IDiots, they sure are being hard on themselves

    Also with the references to “creationists foldup”, “creationists slipped on the soap of their own slippery slope” and the “the age of sciences will rise to be religion’s demise” – this is not something that Idiots would write or endorse.

    I think this video was not made by the IDiots; far too funny for their kind, but I may be completely wrong – who knows, maybe the IDiots do have some intelligence after all.

  267. #268 Cheezits
    April 6, 2008

    So, what ever happened to the person who posted the link to the video in the first place?

  268. #269 ennui
    April 6, 2008

    The first link that I saw was from TheModestAgnostic.

  269. #270 Cheezits
    April 6, 2008

    The first link I saw on this blog was from someone called Elphin. I wonder how they found out about it.

  270. #271 catta
    April 6, 2008

    What a crock. One minute’s research reveals that this is a pre-packaged JibJab “sendable” clip designed to be modified by the end user. It is not custom made for Expelled. Expelled haven’t even hosted it properly – wrong MIME type.

    Funny you should say that. I actually sent a little email about this off to JibJab support, who had this to say in response:

    You can trust that this is definitely an abusive situation. Our business development team has never reached out to the makers of Expelled, nor has our company approved using the Sendable in their own player.

    No idea if they’re going to follow up on this or let it slide. But hey, I like JibJab and they deserve to at least know that people are misusing their stuff.

  271. #272 Greg Laden
    April 6, 2008

    This is clearly an anti-evolution production. I don’t see why there is any doubt about this.

  272. #273 miko
    April 6, 2008

    Yikes, I hope some of you are embarassed at not recognizing someone parodying our side.

    Yes, confusing because it was actually witty and well done, but the message is obviously on the Expelled side.

  273. #274 Max
    April 7, 2008

    It was actually pretty clear to me that this was a parody of the “Darwinist” crew from an expelled viewpoint. To me that only makes it all the more hilarious. Were it not so ridiculously far from reality it might fall into the category of threatening and insulting, but it is. And let’s face it, to imagine any of this crowd as actual rappers is just too funny.

  274. #275 Thanny
    April 7, 2008

    I can’t believe there are still people who think it’s a creationist video.

    Maybe they’re all focusing on the braggadocio, which (as others have pointed out), is nothing but a function of the genre – rappers are shameless self-promoters.

    The “expelled” bit is blatant parody (of what the creationists are claiming), while the lyrics are well-informed and obviously pro-science.

    I wish the video’s creators would just come forward already and set the record straight, so I can stop feeling compelled to write up posts like this.

  275. #276 windy
    April 7, 2008

    Y’all been viral videoed by the EXPELLED crew!

    So how come all the funny went into this clip and none of it (by most accounts) into the actual movie? I think that violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics…

  276. #277 Roslager
    April 7, 2008

    This discussion has made me realize that most hip-hop and rap videos that feature a rapper and his posse were created by the rapper’s enemies in the easy-listening-music establishment with the intention to ridicule the rapper.

  277. #278 Cheezits
    April 7, 2008

    Over a week later, “It’s obviously pro-creationism!” and “It’s obviously anti-creationism!” I love it. :-D

    And still, the Elphin in the room has surprisingly little to say on the subject.

  278. #279 Parrotlover77
    April 7, 2008

    I think the beginning is clearly supposed to parody how Expelled (and fundies/IDers in general) protray science and scientists — building big evil “machines” telling us “don’t worry” and then ejecting any dissenting scientists. The “expelled” forehead stamp shows the source being made fun of.

    But when the rap comes on, it sets the record straight. The lyrics (posted a couple times in the comments above) clearly take a pro-science stance.

    Funny as hell, though. Wow. Loved it.

  279. #280 bigsexy
    April 8, 2008

    “meh” sums it up.

    taxing chorus. old ground.

  280. #281 ReligionIsACrutch
    April 9, 2008

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2fDVRnCSlM

    I think I have exposed who is responsible for this.

  281. #282 386sx
    April 9, 2008
  282. #283 JamesSp.
    April 12, 2008

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2fDVRnCSlM

    I think I have exposed who is responsible for this.

    ==

    Do you know nothing about Canada at all? Do you think it’s all backwater towns, fishing villages and igloos?

    Imagine you found out that this uploader lives in LA. Would you still assume that this video must have come from the Expelled crew, since Ben Stein (who lives in Malibu) is within the radius?

    Plus, British Columbia is notoriously atheistic and liberal (even by Canadian standards).

    Seems pretty unlikely that you’ve uncovered anything major, although it’s nice to know that he/she might live in Vancouver.

  283. #284 Physicalist
    April 12, 2008

    Well ReligionIsACrutch, that is interesting. I think I’ll just wait and see, though (once bitten, twice shy, and all that). I will say that if it was made for the Expelled folks, it sure gave an awful lot of comfort to the enemy. (Yankee Doodle comes to mind . . .)

  284. #285 quietthomas
    April 12, 2008

    By appearing to stay ambiguous in public, the expelled guys are generating a sense of controversy which will no doubt convert to profit. Thank modern programing for bit-torrent!

  285. #286 HE
    April 17, 2008

    Ad #465: Chrys, I agree with your stance but I hear the line “Science silenced that watchdog wingnut Paley” differently. I think the text is “Science silenced that watchdog wiener Paley”. There are multiple plays on words here, summarised below. I find this extremely witty and scientifically literate, like many of the other small gems in the lyrics.

    Paley is a watchdog in two senses: he watches the orthodox interpretation, and introduces the watch analogy famously attacked by Dicky D in his book.

    A “watch dog wiener” is a play on “hot dog wiener” (the type of sausage that goes into a hot dog)

    Paley is a wiener (i.e., a dick)

    Wienter-Paley is a famous theorem/integral in maths.

  286. #287 Jiminy Cricket
    April 27, 2008

    Excellent piss-take of evolution and its proponents, thanks for the laugh! What’s even more funny is watching the typical over-analysing of the evolutionists on here about something that is actually taking the micky out of them and they don’t even know it! :-) A few have caught on, not many.

    Funny thing is, I constantly see humor from creationists and clarity, but alot of seriousness and emotionalism from evolutionists and contrived complexity. Usually they rely on putdowns towards creationists as a mask for underlying annoyance that their theory is in crisis and is being further challenged as time goes on.

    This video is a riot! If it wasn’t meant that way, it sure backfired.

  287. #288 Pip
    April 27, 2008

    The best way to get these guys looking silly, is to make a video that “appears” to be pro evolution, watch them all crowd around in mutual admiration, missing the big picture, whilst they make fools out of themselves in the process. Giving eachother little virtual pats on the backs in who can outdo who in creation putdowns, whilst the creationists sit back, shake their head and laugh.

    The evolution gang mentality :-)

  288. #289 Jiminy Cricket
    April 28, 2008

    If you really want to have a laugh at these clowns on here who can’t even see the blatant obvious p*ss-take of this creative youtube video, with all the ongoing visual and verbal signals that even a child could “get”, take a look at the source of it
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUt7nZdUJIk&feature=related

    You questions are now answered. How to make a monkey out of an evolutionist? You don’t have to, they do it themselves. But thanks for the laughs guys, you were almost funnier than the video! Trust me, you’ve had a lot of people laughing.

  289. #290 Lachlan Hunt
    April 28, 2008

    I think it’s funny how this video was made by Michael Edmondson, of Float On Films which is associated with Premise media who made Expelled, but many atheists felt it was too clever to be made by creationists.

    It’s clear, at least to me, from the intro that it’s promoting the idea of a scientific conspiracy to reject intelligent design and expel scientists who believe it, even though most of the lyrics in the actual song take a pretty good shot at creationists.

    For instance, Lyric’s like “[Dawkins] is smarter than you, he’s got a science degree” fairly accurately sums up the position of intelligent design proponents within the scientific community. And “creationists slipped on the soap of their own slippery slope” nicely alludes to the slippery slope fallacies, such as that used in the film of Evolution leading to Nazis

    I think, even though the video itself has clearly been a viral success, the actual propaganda they wanted to promote has been sidelined by the more accurate, yet ironic, message that the whole Evolution/Intelligent Design controversy is a farse.

  290. #291 Sophia
    June 4, 2008

    This WAS hilarious, it was clever and such and adorable

    but the message makes me laugh even harder. it’s hilarious how the makers tried to make science look dogmatic, yet the message itself is ignored because of the adorableness of our beloved atheists of note. haha

  291. #292 Ichthyic
    June 4, 2008

    Float On Films which is associated with Premise media

    no, it’s not.

    they were contracted by Premise to make the vid.

    that’s it.

    Edmonson is not a creationist.

    oops, there goes your false sense of schadenfreude.

    moron.