Pharyngula

Posted by: Hael | March 28, 2008 10:23 PM

That's pretty much the greatest thing I've ever seen.

Posted by: Inoculated Mind | March 28, 2008 10:25 PM

Damn! How'd you post it before me?

Spread this thing!

Posted by: phenohype | March 28, 2008 10:26 PM

it made my week, that's for damn sure

Posted by: Justin | March 28, 2008 10:29 PM

http://digg.com/comedy/Richard_Dawkins_Beware_the_Believers

Sorry for the digg spam

Posted by: Dave Carlson | March 28, 2008 10:30 PM

LOL. I'm not sure what to make of the message, but that was absolutely hilarious. Who made this?

Posted by: Chris | March 28, 2008 10:34 PM

More of that! If there's one way to overcome creationists, it's with cool. And this, is cool.

Posted by: Adrienne | March 28, 2008 10:36 PM

And that little video is more entertaining and smart than "Expelled" could ever hope to be.

Posted by: Chuck Goecke | March 28, 2008 10:39 PM

And isn't that Genie hot!

Posted by: JRQ | March 28, 2008 10:40 PM

Now THAT'S framing.

Posted by: Inoculated Mind | March 28, 2008 10:42 PM

Now THAT'S framing.

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

Posted by: michael dorian | March 28, 2008 10:43 PM

Virtual viral genius! I'd never seen Eugenie Scott in a bikini before... And who knew Hitchens was so gangsta?

Posted by: jdb | March 28, 2008 10:45 PM

Yeah, Pimped Out Dennett pretty much stole that show for me.

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | March 28, 2008 10:47 PM

I think Hitchens' head band and cig is what sealed it for me.

Posted by: Steve Ulven | March 28, 2008 10:48 PM

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).

Posted by: SteveC | March 28, 2008 11:02 PM

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"

Posted by: michael dorian | March 28, 2008 11:06 PM

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

Posted by: JRQ | March 28, 2008 11:10 PM

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?

Posted by: SteveC | March 28, 2008 11:10 PM

> Darwin raising the roof

yeah, that was really well done, and hilarious.

Posted by: br | March 28, 2008 11:13 PM

I'm almost positive that the lyricist is MC Paul Barman - the resemblance to his voice and the fact that he works in "Democritus" makes me believe it's him.

Posted by: UprightAlice | March 28, 2008 11:14 PM

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.

Posted by: Patrick | March 28, 2008 11:18 PM

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.

Posted by: Sue Laris | March 28, 2008 11:20 PM

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.

Posted by: James F | March 28, 2008 11:31 PM

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

Posted by: D'oh! | March 28, 2008 11:33 PM

Ok... What's up with the $ necklaces that PZ and others are wearing? Any theories? A parody of the Expelled's Big Science theme?

Posted by: Robyn | March 28, 2008 11:42 PM

AHAHAHAHAHAHA! That was a-freakin'-mazing.
Oh man, my head hurts from laughing.

Posted by: Brian Coughlan | March 28, 2008 11:50 PM

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!

Posted by: SMgr | March 28, 2008 11:56 PM

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

Posted by: SMgr | March 29, 2008 12:18 AM

Sure, could be someone who grew up watching them. I've done animation and music. A lot of work went into this. There are endless little details that are really finely honed. This is professional, polished, piece.

Posted by: PaulR | March 29, 2008 12:22 AM

Well... to whomever made this...

You are a sick, twisted unholy mother@*#%$-er!!

Don't ever change!

Posted by: Burt Humburg | March 29, 2008 12:43 AM

I'm guessing JibJab.

BCH

Posted by: themadlolscientist | March 29, 2008 12:45 AM

---ROFL---

No worries, P-Zed - rappers don't need to be able to sing!

Posted by: freelunch | March 29, 2008 12:56 AM

It's a bit in the style of JibJab, but they always sign their work. The poster is randomslice, someone new to YouTube.

Posted by: Dave Carlson | March 29, 2008 1:08 AM

Does anybody else get a Randy Olson-esque "third way" vibe from the video?

Posted by: Jim Battle | March 29, 2008 1:09 AM

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.

Posted by: polypterus | March 29, 2008 1:12 AM

Acutally maybe it's not.. nevermind.

Posted by: CalGeorge | March 29, 2008 1:29 AM

Instant classic!

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

Posted by: October Mermaid | March 29, 2008 1:36 AM

One of my dreams is to appear in a video like this someday. *Sigh*

Posted by: Robert Maynard | March 29, 2008 1:39 AM

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.

Posted by: BathTub | March 29, 2008 1:44 AM

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.

Posted by: Cheezits | March 29, 2008 1:49 AM

It beat the hell out of that Kent Hovind put-down video that was flagged for violating copyright last year.

Posted by: Che | March 29, 2008 1:58 AM

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

Posted by: tacitus | March 29, 2008 2:11 AM

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.

Posted by: Dustin, OM | March 29, 2008 2:17 AM

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

Posted by: Rey Fox | March 29, 2008 2:18 AM

"At the moment I think the biggest joke is how much we're willing to believe it's not actually a dig at us"

It's not. The wealth of references is far too rich to be the products of one of the blinkered bloviators of the cdesignproponentsist crowd. It would go over the heads of that target audience. This is just an over-the-top parody of the "Big Science" thing that they bandy about. Think about the Evil Atheist Conspiracy, this is the same kind of thing. It's taking their grandiose statements about what the atheist/evolutionist crowd hides about themselves, which we know to be exaggerations or outright lies, and acting as if they were true and stating them outright to flag up just how absurd their notion of atheism/evolutionism is.

Posted by: Rey Fox | March 29, 2008 2:19 AM

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

TMI, dude!

Posted by: Hank Fox | March 29, 2008 2:24 AM

Bazowwie.

Whoever did this, I want to have your children.

Well, maybe not ME. But somebody should. We need about ten thousand more of you.

Posted by: catta | March 29, 2008 2:28 AM

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

Posted by: Infophile | March 29, 2008 2:32 AM

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...

Posted by: genewitch | March 29, 2008 2:38 AM

I saw this earlier this afternoon, and it's obviously a satire. it doesn't even hide it.

It's over the top because it's intended to be funny. Humor is exaggeration. If this was a rap video bill Nye style, it wouldn't be as funny. This is good stuff.

Posted by: Michael X | March 29, 2008 2:42 AM

Guys, this emphatically is not slick creationist anything. If you're spending time dissecting each and every possibly metaphor so as to uncover a creationist stunt, you can rest assured that this video was not meant to humor someone of your tastes. Though if it has, all for the better.

I'm actually impressed that the lyrics are so smart, while being so rhythmically smooth. It's nice to have someone getting some play who's a good {Insert creative art here} and happens to be an atheist, than someone who's an atheist, while only being a mediocre {insert creative art here}. My case in point is christian rock. They're only known (by anyone) because of the message and not the skill at which they preform (as anyone who's been subjected to it can tell you).

That guy ain't bad at all.

Posted by: Thomas S. Howard | March 29, 2008 2:46 AM

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.

Posted by: Sue Laris | March 29, 2008 2:50 AM

Last thing I say, since I have now lost respect for a few people here:

"viral message" = the decade's [vomits] "paradigm"

Posted by: ennui | March 29, 2008 2:53 AM

We appreciate your concern. It is noted, and stupid.
-Rapper Dicky 'D'

Should probably have been said directly to Robert Maynard and others who don't yet get it. Keep watching and listening until you do! Dick to the Doc to the PhD!

Dustin: My inner homunculus is pondering whether there is a shorter term for 'meta-double-reverse-Poe's-law'?

Posted by: Dude | March 29, 2008 3:03 AM

This is absolutely 100% NOT made by creationists or anyone associated with Expelled.

If you take away the caricature heads you'd see a goofy looking bald guy with some RPGs (rape prevention glasses), and his "rap" has been linked on PZs blog in the past. He is definitely not a creationist or a believer.

Yo.

Posted by: Steven | March 29, 2008 3:10 AM

Mega LuLz

People are mental.

Posted by: allonym | March 29, 2008 3:14 AM

I'm actually impressed that the lyrics are so smart, while being so rhythmically smooth. It's nice to have someone getting some play who's a good {Insert creative art here} and happens to be an atheist...

Posted by: ChrisGose | March 29, 2008 3:17 AM

A picture of Eugenie Scott ontop of a fat ugly man in a bikini top.

That is the funniest shit for me in the video.

This is clearly satire of the Expelled's claim that scientists are these unstoppable bullies who run the science lab like a street gang.

Posted by: Janine, ID | March 29, 2008 3:21 AM

The views count on YouTube seems to be stuck at 1066.

Could YouTube have stuck this video in their "memory hole" to avoid having to acknowledge its popularity? That and the censorship of anti-jihad videos means it is past time for a competitor to YouTube.

Posted by: Engineer-Poet

I just checked. It is still at 1066. 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?

Posted by: H.H. | March 29, 2008 3:24 AM

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.

Posted by: MC Escher | March 29, 2008 3:25 AM

The semi-authoritative lyric transcript:

(my thanks to Brian Coughlan for typing the better part of it out for me this evening)

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.

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: 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 : 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 untoppleable, the Dick Doc'll roll up as you creationists foldup

you haters talkin' bull,
don't you know that this Dick is un-cock-frickin' blockable ...

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 rappinest, rabidest atheist who 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 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.

Hollah!

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!

Posted by: Damian | March 29, 2008 3:38 AM

At the beginning of the video it says: "Reporting idiocy isn't really squealing". It is so obviously satire based on the claims of Expelled and other anti-reality groups.

Also, notice that PZ has a picture of a squid on his hat!

I am downloading it so that I can extract images of PZ and Dickie D holding their crotch.

Posted by: Thomas S. Howard | March 29, 2008 3:48 AM

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

Posted by: David | March 29, 2008 4:05 AM

Listen again. Look out for "Is this on".

Then go to the start of the Lynchburg VA vid, and then the questions with the moron mocking it trying to get a rise.

Great reference, I liked it.

Posted by: C. L. Hanson | March 29, 2008 4:23 AM

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".

Posted by: Viscount | March 29, 2008 4:40 AM

Chorus : Yeah he's the Dick to the Doc to the phd,

I think it's "Dick to the Dawk to the PhD," which is even better!

Posted by: Michael X | March 29, 2008 5:13 AM

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

And hey, I love the squid too.

Posted by: Zarquon | March 29, 2008 5:20 AM

A squid hat would be a great thing to wear to a showing of Expelled. Also a great gift for Squidmas.

Posted by: catta | March 29, 2008 5:39 AM

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...

Posted by: 386sx | March 29, 2008 5:44 AM

I'm almost 100% sure we'll find this is from the South Park boys.

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

I would bet it's from the Expelled people, what with the Darwinian gadget thingy grabbing the creationist scientist (who didn't explain what the "something else going on" was) and expelling him and all that.

Posted by: MC Escher | March 29, 2008 5:57 AM

@ 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.

Posted by: David | March 29, 2008 6:10 AM

Would Expelled refer to Creationism, really? Thought it was Intelligent Design.

Posted by: JCE | March 29, 2008 6:21 AM

This was catchy, detailed (loved PZs cepahlopod beret), had no Ben Stein knee action that I saw and far too clever to be from the same minds as you-know-what. Am still laughing. If it mocked everyone so be it - it was certainly an unequal mocking and well worth it! :P

Posted by: Thomas S. Howard | March 29, 2008 6:40 AM

catta:

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

Wrong battle. You're thinking of Agincourt in 1415. St. Crispin's Day and all that. 1066 was Hastings, which was the big comeback of the crossbow and also marked the start of the dominance of heavy cavalry in English warfare, i.e. knights. Agincourt, which brought the longbow to bear so effectively, was one of the first clear signs of heavy cavalry's eventual demise. Kind of ironic that Normans invading England from France really helped to kick off the era of knights in shining armor as popularly understood, and then a bunch of English under the command of William's descendant invade France and make a huge contribution to the process of rendering them obsolete. Yay History!

Posted by: David | March 29, 2008 7:04 AM

On a third listen I'm reminded of Goldie Lookin' Chain.

Posted by: Daoud | March 29, 2008 7:14 AM

It's "D" to the "DAWK" to the the phd.

It's not by Ben Stein you idiots.

And a high def torrent-version can be gotten here:

http://www.mininova.org/tor/1278276

Posted by: Lago | March 29, 2008 7:30 AM

"""The line "...storming wilber by force" of course, is a reference to William Wilberforce. Brilliant."
Actually, I think it's a reference to his son, Sam Wilberforce
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Wilberforce
He lost that legendary debate with Huxley, back in 1860.""

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."

Posted by: booboo | March 29, 2008 7:42 AM

It's pretty clearly a pro-Expelled video, folks.

Posted by: Lago | March 29, 2008 7:45 AM

"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...

Posted by: HadasS | March 29, 2008 7:49 AM

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

I'll take your word for it, Lago, but I still say the video reference was for Sam Wilberforce, not his father.

Posted by: Lago | March 29, 2008 7:54 AM

"I'll take your word for it, Lago, but I still say the video reference was for Sam Wilberforce, not his father."

The video clearly shows "Soapy Sam"

Posted by: Lago | March 29, 2008 7:58 AM

"Lago, quite. For example, it actually contains the word creationist. I don't think dedicated IDists could bring themselves to use their version of the c-word. Big Tent and all that, but they really get touchy when anyone dares to associate ID with creationism."

Yes, that is extremely strong evidence that this is not from the Expelled people, at least not directly...

Posted by: Thomas S. Howard | March 29, 2008 8:04 AM

Plus, there's the "creationists slipped on the soap of their own slippery slope" line which clinches the Soapy Sam ID, pretty much.

Posted by: Thomas S. Howard | March 29, 2008 8:07 AM

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

Posted by: Why | March 29, 2008 8:15 AM

Detailed explanation of a joke kills it.

Posted by: Tom H | March 29, 2008 8:16 AM

Was I the only one that understood the machine they created to be Science?

Posted by: Thomas S. Howard | March 29, 2008 8:27 AM

Why:

Detailed explanation of a joke kills it.

/me watches clip again.

Nope. Still fucking hilarious.

Posted by: Reginald Selkirk | March 29, 2008 8:42 AM

Oh sure, it's got PYGMYS, but what about the DWARFS?

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | March 29, 2008 9:09 AM

Lago, quite. For example, it actually contains the word creationist. I don't think dedicated IDists could bring themselves to use their version of the c-word. Big Tent and all that, but they really get touchy when anyone dares to associate ID with creationism.

I think that pretty strong evidence right there.

Although ID isn't about god and look at all the god talk bouncing around their echo chamber right now.

Posted by: Adrienne | March 29, 2008 9:17 AM

Notice the line about "framing the discourse."

Posted by: JRQ | March 29, 2008 9:27 AM

The IDiots are not responsible for this.

Remember, if this was made by the expelled/DI/creationism folks, it would be the FIRST TIME EVER they put this level of effort into something for which the intended audience was a bunch of science-literates.

There is just not enough overlap between those segments of the population who would get the jokes in this video, and those to whom IDiot PR is invariably directed.

Posted by: speedwell | March 29, 2008 9:49 AM

Peter Lund, great catch on the Girl Genius reference, w00t!

For the rest of you who are missing out: http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/comic.php

Posted by: Mark | March 29, 2008 9:55 AM

Isn't that B. Stein himself whapping Paley at 2:00?

Posted by: I don't get it? | March 29, 2008 10:04 AM

The joke. Why is it funny? Or is it not funny, but serious?
Thanks

Posted by: Jack Rawlinson | March 29, 2008 10:22 AM

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.

Posted by: ice9 | March 29, 2008 10:28 AM

Not infringement to use the logo (if they did.) Fair comment, no worries.

As the tradition of satire goes, this is ambiguous. Few satirists can resist slipping their real purpose into plain view at one point or another (see "open letter" spaghetti monster; even "Modest Proposal" tips its cards clearly). That's how you make sure your effort goes in the right column. Given the narrow mindedness of the ID/Creationist audience, I'd say if it's satire it is weak on the audience evaluation. In this case, whoever gets it best may be the target of the message, but if the supposed beneficiaries of the message can't own it because they can't understand it or are repelled by its mode or language then the argument is ineffective. It's not enough to score a point; you have to know you've scored a point, and most of the people who favor "Expelled" would be mystified by the medium, annoyed and confused by the cultural references, and offended by the ambiguity.

I think it's an entertainment. It feels to me like a celebration of complexity (irreducible or not.) The process of understanding the video is in itself scientific.

The style may be South Park, but it's Terry Gilliam first. The video draws heavily on his Python and earlier work in visual form, animation, and in the glorious obscurity and smooth perfection of the allusions. (of course, so does much of today's work, and the tools we have also lean us that way.) MC on the stage, curtain layers, audience reaction shot, things crashing through walls, complicated machinery (definitely from The Incredibles), stream-of-consciousness shifts, interior-exterior movements of POV, full production-number framework, and more.
It's pure fanzine speculation of the Brittany Spears vintage, but what are blogs for if not for taking absurd longshots under an alias? Gilliam did it. He's bored because his current project is on hold because Heath Ledger died, and because Gilliam hates Ben Stein, and because as a child he Gilliam was taunted by Creationists and later was insulted by his PhD advisor at UC Pomona. (I made the last three pieces of evidence up. If Mathis can do it, so can I.)

ice

Posted by: Reginald Selkirk | March 29, 2008 10:41 AM

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.

Posted by: Dude | March 29, 2008 10:46 AM

The second funniest thing about this video...

All the people here who think it is some creationist creation!

Seriously, you guys/gals are crackin me up!

Posted by: RedMann | March 29, 2008 10:50 AM

When Dawkins kicked the dog, I immediately thought of ole Slimy Sal's remark about Darwin and puppies.

Posted by: ice9 | March 29, 2008 10:56 AM

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

Posted by: Muzz | March 29, 2008 10:59 AM

Hi all. One of the new adherents here.

I think this thing has been too long in the works for it to be a directly related, but it seems obviously in the same spirit as the article likening PZ Myers to Elvis. Here instead Dawkins is Eminem (and using all the knotty parodies and meanings he's noted for). First comes the spooky gag with the machine, as the stuffy overbearing and slightly scary version that 'Expelled' would have you believe. Then the real story of science and scientists as hip outsider and streetfighter who won't be denied, dissing anyone and everyone that stood in his way.
I think who ever did it is having a poke at the whole situation, including Dawkins' reputation for seeming arrogant and abrasive. But they're coming from the science side of things and their conclusion is clear; Expelled and things like it are inadvertently making rock stars out of scientists.
Quite a turn up, science being rock n' roll or hip hop don't you think? But hey, it tells it like it is, bothers mothers, fathers, conservatives and the establishment, calls daughters away from homemaking and motherhood where they belong. Works for me.

Posted by: gyokusai | March 29, 2008 11:04 AM

Another minuscule amendmend to the lyrics:

Time to open your eyes, get yourself wise, the age of science will rise to be religion's demise

should read:

Time to open your eyes, get yourself wise, the age of science has arised to be religion's demise

Cheers,
^_^J.

Posted by: freelunch | March 29, 2008 11:05 AM

David Marjanović asked:

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

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.

Posted by: Puddock | March 29, 2008 11:06 AM

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

Posted by: Thomas S. Howard | March 29, 2008 11:09 AM

Speaking of kicking the dog, that's long been a cheap way to impute evilness:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/KickTheDog

Posted by: Danny Schade | March 29, 2008 11:26 AM

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. :)

Posted by: gyokusai | March 29, 2008 11:34 AM

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.

Posted by: Hank Fox | March 29, 2008 12:08 PM

Can't be by IDiots.

The limit on their sense of humor is set permanently to "Droll."

"Screamingly Funny" is waaay beyond them.

They also find creativity difficult. If they were insulting Dawkins and PZ, they'd come up with some sort of embarrassingly childish stick-figure caricatures. These were COOL. Dawkins as a chill, sexy rapper? No IDer would do that.

Any part of it that seems to be referentially negative towards science is just balls-out gangsta pride IN science, with a few left-handed in-yo'-face bitch slaps thrown to Ben Stein's Short-Bus Posse just to show them how much we're not afraid of their silly shit.

And I thought the New York Dolls' "Dance Like a Monkey" video was the coolest ever.

Posted by: Logicel | March 29, 2008 12:10 PM

Fortunately, there is less Dennett (clearly Dennett has missed his real vocation) than Dawkins or else I would be engulfed in hysterical laughter and unable to pick out a few finer points in re-watching the vid.

The dollar signs hanging around the necks of all the rapsters is a cleverly relevant device to point out that bling is proof of success. Money is viewed in America as a positive item. Science mints the coin for the masses while religion mints it for a few. The predominance of dollar signs though out the vid, and especially strapped around the Science Machine (scientific method has provided so much for humanity) just drives this reality straight home. Science is Success and expressed via a symbol to which many, especially Americans, can relate.

At the same time, this device cuts through the hypocritical relationship religions shared with wealth--wealth is for the religion big whigs and their sponsors, for the masses it is only spiritual 'wealth' that is encouraged.

Until the makers identify from what angle they made this vid, it is useless to guess at that said angle. However, it quite revealing that the dollar sign aspect is seen by some as being negative. Oh, right--nobody wants money and the better standard of living it provides.

Posted by: MartinM | March 29, 2008 12:18 PM

They also find creativity difficult.

Oh, I don't know about that. It would be rather hard to come up with, say, the 'dancing Greenland' hypothesis without creativity. What they find difficult is using their creativity in ways that aren't utterly ridiculous.

Posted by: Blake Stacey | March 29, 2008 12:28 PM

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.

Posted by: tsiatko | March 29, 2008 12:44 PM

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

Posted by: C. L. Hanson | March 29, 2008 12:49 PM

Are all the bodies the same person? This thing is too hilarious -- I have to admit I can't stop watching it. My little Leo likes it too.

Posted by: Hairhead | March 29, 2008 1:11 PM

Jesus! (;-/) I cannot believe there is even a debate about what side this video is on. On every level, lyrically and visually, the video puts down creationism, supports methodological science, and most importantly, *assumes cultural sophistication and confidence on the part of those portions/persons of the science establishment they gently tweak*. Tell me, who's more insulted about being portrayed as a rapper: Myers or Dennett?

And, yeah, it's very sophisticated and hysterically funny, particularly for well-educated people with a sense of irony who are not afraid to laugh at themselves (and that excludes the creationists automatically).

Kudos to the Unknown Creator.

Could this be a manifestation of the divine FSM? !!!

Posted by: C. L. Hanson | March 29, 2008 1:25 PM

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!"

Posted by: June | March 29, 2008 1:30 PM

Correction: That referred to MadProphet at #112.

Posted by: alex fairchld | March 29, 2008 2:08 PM

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.

Posted by: madprophet | March 29, 2008 2:18 PM

Reply to June:
#120: ... maybe there is some power beyond what we understand that is responsible for the start (just the start) of the universe.

"How about a universe that cycles forever between Big Bang and Big Stretch?"

Completely possible.

The problem is we simply don't KNOW. An example: We all accept gravity's constant values, and we are extremely confident that those values are indeed constant throughout the universe. But we don't KNOW how gravity really works. The guys at CERN are hoping to get a little closer to the truth, but nobody YET has any certainty why mass attracts mass. The last thing I am saying that gravity exists because God made it so. That is just nuts.

But what I am saying is we simply don't know how the Big Bang occurred. Until we figure that out with certainty, I think all theories have to be treated with some modicum of respect.

Like I alluded to in my last post, the results and effects of evolution are as indisputable as the results and effects of gravity. But my question is simply, "what started the whole thing off?" Until that is answered, I cannot completely discount a theory of a higher power starting the whole damn thing off. I am not talking about some Judeo-Christian concept of a benevolent parent-like god that watches over your every move. That is just plain nuts.

But bottom line for me, if energy cannot be created or destroyed, where did the universe's energy come from in the first place?

Posted by: Julie K | March 29, 2008 2:40 PM

This is far too funny and clever to be the work of IDots/creationists. I can't see them giving PZ a squid hat.

(Oh yeah, I want one of those squid hats.)

Posted by: MartinM | March 29, 2008 2:46 PM

But bottom line for me, if energy cannot be created or destroyed, where did the universe's energy come from in the first place?

The question is invalid, on multiple levels. Firstly, because it assumes that the Universe's energy was not always around, and secondly, because there exists no global principle of mass-energy conservation in general relativity. We have no overwhelming reason to suppose that mass-energy is conserved on the grand scale, and even if we did, we have no reason to suppose that this is any kind of problem for any modern cosmological models.

Posted by: lolocaust denier | March 29, 2008 2:57 PM

The #1 sign it's not promoting Expelled: there's not a single mention of Nazi Germany.

I had other observations but it's just beating a dead horse now. I think the tone of the piece really favours the scientists, but clearly the general response shows that that's subjective.

Posted by: MC Escher | March 29, 2008 3:11 PM

a somewhat uncensored version:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtySkUo-PhU

Posted by: Ian | March 29, 2008 3:14 PM

Come on, people, Ben Stein clearly had nothing to do with this. His ego is far too large to even consider marketing his movie in a way that doesn't even include him.

Posted by: Ian | March 29, 2008 3:21 PM

#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.

Posted by: Rey Fox | March 29, 2008 3:24 PM

"Okay, so it's a viral marketing piece for Expelled."

"In that case, it's a viral marketing piece which parodies the central theme in Expelled, establishes a false idea about the production values of Expelled, and is going to attract an audience, if it attracts an audience at all, which is looking for a humourous take only to find some ham-handed and lugubrious sermonizing, while putting off an audience of genuine holy rollers with bleeped out lyrics and employment of popular music, rather than "worship songs"."

In addition, it features the visages of several people who aren't going to be recognized by anyone outside the evolution-creationism blogosphere and probably not by very many people INSIDE the ID audience (Eugenie Scott, Clarence Darrow, Daniel Dennett, PZ Myers). Most people would see this video and wonder "Who are all the bearded guys?"

I don't know much about "viral marketing", but this video does not seem very catching to a wide audience.

Posted by: Dustin | March 29, 2008 3:37 PM

woah.. Youtube pulled the video already!?

Does anyone know why ThinkerHA's account was shut down?

Posted by: Paha Arkkitehti | March 29, 2008 3:52 PM

Hank,

I am wondering if it ever does - just can't stop laughing at it. How sad it is that I did dl the hires-torrent, made it to my iPod and actually went to jogging with the vid in repeat. o_O

Posted by: Brownian, OM | March 29, 2008 4:24 PM

If memory serves, I believe cdesign proponentsists' disdain for art has already been established. Further, as there appears to be no evidence of plagiarism, it is this court's opinion that the video is a parody of cdesign proponentsist claims.

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

Judgment for the defendants.

You may all be interviewed by Doug Llewelyn now.

Posted by: kathryn in california | March 29, 2008 4:42 PM

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.

Posted by: Ferrous Patella | March 29, 2008 5:27 PM

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

Posted by: nowoo | March 29, 2008 5:43 PM

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

Posted by: June | March 29, 2008 6:11 PM

MadProphet: Thanks for your thoughtful reply.

You [#112] contemplate a power that created our universe. I [#228] propose that our universe always existed.

Your concept requires a power that is able to control all of the energy of our universe and is able to plan/design/create all of its processes and mechanisms and contingencies for billions of years. My plan requires only what we already have in our universe.

You would need to explain how your power was itself created (Sagan's regression). I require no creator at all.

If you were to propose that "something started the whole thing off", I would simply deny that, with Occam's Razor on my side.

Posted by: JCE | March 29, 2008 6:36 PM

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?

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | March 29, 2008 6:41 PM

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?

Posted by: theorist | March 29, 2008 7:41 PM

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.

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | March 29, 2008 7:45 PM

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!!!"

Posted by: freelunch | March 29, 2008 8:16 PM

theorist worried:

They post all our praise on their website, and include at the end of the Expelled movie.

No danger. Dembski and his co-conspirators are neither informed enough nor sufficiently infused with humor to pull it off. However sly they think they are, I do not credit them with the ability or desire to make themselves a laughingstock so they can fake us out with brilliant marketing for a really bad movie.

Posted by: CalGeorge | March 29, 2008 8:38 PM

What is happening to Darwin on the boat? I don't get that bit. His face changes and then...?

Posted by: CalGeorge | March 29, 2008 8:45 PM

Everyone should go to YouTube, click on "Watch this video in higher quality" and watch full screen. Great!

Posted by: nowoo | March 29, 2008 8:48 PM

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

Link doesn't work.

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

Posted by: Thanny | March 29, 2008 9:22 PM

Forget the "high" quality on YouTube. Do what others have suggested, and get the high quality version here:

http://www.mininova.org/tor/1278276

Learn how BitTorrent works if you must - it's worth it. The file is standard HDTV resolution (1280x720), and looks good even playing fullscreen on my 30" monitor.

Posted by: gyokusai | March 29, 2008 9:32 PM

MAJeff never mind, the very second I hit the "post" button I realized I got your remark backward.

LOL!!!

^_^J.

Posted by: Russell Blackford | March 29, 2008 10:24 PM

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.

Posted by: JW | March 29, 2008 11:25 PM

Folks, I think this IS a viral video for Expelled. The only source for the video seems to be this "randomslice" user on YouTube, who created an account on 28 March and has no other videos. Wouldn't you expect somebody who spent a lot of time and effort into making such a (now much-praised) video to take credit for it? Where's the original web site? There is none. There is no source. Why would they hide? Because it's Premise Media.

Like lonelygirl and magibon, and many other examples, when a weird person/group or video/series comes out of nowhere, it's usually viral/marketing in nature.

Posted by: TAW | March 29, 2008 11:29 PM

For anyone who isn't sure of the entire cast (though I'm guessing everyone here will be), I've compiled a quick list of the Dawkins posse.

Posted by: trimtab | March 29, 2008 11:36 PM

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!

Posted by: ZekeCDN | March 29, 2008 11:47 PM

Add me to the list of those who can't believe how anyone could take this as being anything but pro-science.

Oh and FWIW I'm still hearing "I'll still be poppin' my collar earning more dollars than Allah."

Posted by: Bob L | March 30, 2008 12:11 AM

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

Posted by: kathryn in california | March 30, 2008 1:16 AM

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."

Posted by: kathryn in california | March 30, 2008 1:44 AM

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?

Posted by: kathryn in california | March 30, 2008 2:33 AM

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?

Posted by: Michael X | March 30, 2008 2:46 AM

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.

Posted by: TOO MUCH | March 30, 2008 3:14 AM

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.

Posted by: Russell Blackford | March 30, 2008 5:32 AM

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.

Posted by: kevinj | March 30, 2008 7:44 AM

@ 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.

Posted by: 386sx | March 30, 2008 10:04 AM

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!!

Posted by: ice9 | March 30, 2008 10:22 AM

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

Posted by: amk | March 30, 2008 11:25 AM

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?

Posted by: buck | March 30, 2008 11:52 AM

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...

Posted by: Mike | March 30, 2008 1:45 PM

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.

Posted by: Ryan Cunningham | March 30, 2008 1:58 PM

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.

Posted by: gmm | March 30, 2008 2:23 PM

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

Posted by: themadlolscientist | March 30, 2008 3:03 PM

The Machine is actually a cyber-Mike Wazowski.

Posted by: J Myers | March 30, 2008 4:22 PM

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.

Posted by: trimtab | March 30, 2008 5:13 PM

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!

Posted by: Ichthyic | March 30, 2008 5:30 PM

This sounds like a pretty good call -- a bit of what Dawkins calls "atheist buttery."

nope.

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

sorry.

not sure how so many seem to be missing that, but it really is what makes it so funny.

That's how they're trying to portray themselves!

exactly. It's how creationists are portraying the situation that is being lampooned here. That is the whole substance and theme of the vid, period.

Posted by: J Myers | March 30, 2008 6:12 PM

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?

Posted by: amk | March 30, 2008 6:46 PM

Shorter DickyD: Science. It works, bitches.

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

Posted by: MikeM | March 30, 2008 7:34 PM

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.

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | March 30, 2008 7:54 PM

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.

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | March 30, 2008 8:02 PM

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.

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | March 30, 2008 8:10 PM

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!!! [v̥ḁˤːːːːː]!!!

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

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | March 30, 2008 8:15 PM

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

Exactly.

Posted by: MC Escher | March 30, 2008 8:20 PM

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.

Posted by: Reginald Selkirk | March 30, 2008 8:34 PM

It seems to me that the film acknowledges the alleged arrogance of the "new atheist" - and celebrates it...

Posted by: Michael X | March 30, 2008 8:47 PM

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.

Posted by: George Smiley | March 30, 2008 8:52 PM

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.

Posted by: 386sx | March 30, 2008 8:59 PM

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.

Posted by: 386sx | March 30, 2008 9:05 PM

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

Posted by: Mike D | March 30, 2008 9:41 PM

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?

Posted by: JCE | March 30, 2008 10:11 PM

One of the other 300-series posts got me back thinking on something that has puzzled me about this thread, so I scanned through the comments again, this time to see what was wrong with the pattern. There are three things that I expected to see in this thread by now that were *not* there and the thing is starting to smell... fishy :P

Then I looked at the calendar(oh-ho!) and formed a reasonable testable hypothesis On the Origin of the Video. It's better than my usual ones because it requires no work from me other than to sit back and wait - no messy field collection, no grueling lab studies and no statistics!

Whoever the maker(s)is/are, wherever you are, after many viewings I am still liking this video and the music, lyrics, hats etc. but am also getting additional enjoyment from the fact that I now think you have punked us but good. I would like to stand you a beer or three someday, preferably before the first thesis analyzing the symbolism of it all ends up getting someone a degree.

If it turns out that this is actually the work of the Expelled production team (current null hypothesis :P oh come ON people, are we really the sort who believe in miraculous changes to competency and senses of humour?) it will not change my opinion of the video one iota, although I would think a lot more highly of the Expelled team (if not their previous efforts, candor and general philosophies). I seriously doubt it but one of the nice things about being a scientist is that we are allowed to be wrong and change our minds when presented with verifiable contradictory evidence.

Posted by: BathTub | March 30, 2008 10:34 PM

One thing, The South Park guys are not Athiests, and don't have a high opinion of Richard Dawkins.

Posted by: J Myers | March 30, 2008 11:16 PM

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.

Posted by: Ichthyic | March 30, 2008 11:22 PM

"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

Posted by: Physicalist | March 30, 2008 11:46 PM

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?).

Posted by: Ichthyic | March 31, 2008 12:19 AM

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.

Posted by: tintenfisch | March 31, 2008 12:28 AM

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.

Posted by: Ichthyic | March 31, 2008 12:55 AM

I keep thinking I would love to have a little collar radio like "little tool", so I too could call on "big gadget" whenever folks like Ken Ham skulk about.

Posted by: Grammar RWA | March 31, 2008 3:11 AM

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

Posted by: Gordy | March 31, 2008 3:20 AM

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

Posted by: Michael X | March 31, 2008 3:56 AM

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.

Posted by: nameinuse | March 31, 2008 9:16 AM

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

Posted by: Reginald Selkirk | March 31, 2008 9:27 AM

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

Posted by: Ken Cope | March 31, 2008 11:57 AM

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.

Posted by: snead | March 31, 2008 12:55 PM

Oops. I see too late that I've been scooped.

Posted by: Dude | March 31, 2008 2:54 PM

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

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

Posted by: Robster, FCD | March 31, 2008 3:43 PM

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.

Posted by: blf | March 31, 2008 3:55 PM

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".)

Posted by: Paha Arkkitehti | March 31, 2008 5:09 PM

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

Posted by: Lago | March 31, 2008 7:10 PM

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...

Posted by: Lago | March 31, 2008 7:21 PM

I believe, from what you can see here, the Dennett body double is played by Bobby Lee, and the lead rapper is Jamie Kennedy, and whenever you see a skinny guy with a wife beater T-shirt it is Jamie

Posted by: Ichthyic | March 31, 2008 7:23 PM

Here is one by him...

?

Posted by: windy | March 31, 2008 7:28 PM

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. ;)

Posted by: eliza | March 31, 2008 7:31 PM

Cuttlefish, is that you? ;)

Posted by: Lago | March 31, 2008 7:46 PM

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...

Posted by: CrypticLife | March 31, 2008 8:27 PM

Interesting that Dawkins wears a clock showing five minutes to midnight, which seems to reference the atomic clock to armageddon.

Posted by: J Myers | March 31, 2008 9:52 PM

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.

Posted by: 386sx | March 31, 2008 10:03 PM

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

Posted by: Physicalist | March 31, 2008 10:52 PM

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 . . .

Posted by: Lago | March 31, 2008 11:09 PM

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

Posted by: Maybe | March 31, 2008 11:24 PM

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.

Posted by: Lago | March 31, 2008 11:33 PM

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...

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | March 31, 2008 11:46 PM

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.

Posted by: noblecaboose | April 1, 2008 1:05 AM

#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)

Posted by: The Droids You Are Looking For | April 1, 2008 4:23 AM

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

Posted by: JCE | April 1, 2008 6:56 AM

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

Posted by: Torben | April 1, 2008 8:29 AM

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.

Posted by: Mike D | April 1, 2008 9:48 AM

You can count on t-shirts with the slogan:

"I'm smarter than you. I've got a science degree."

Posted by: Physicalist | April 1, 2008 11:53 AM

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

Posted by: Robster, FCD | April 1, 2008 12:29 PM

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.

Posted by: Grammar RWA | April 1, 2008 12:55 PM

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.

Posted by: Bert Chadick | April 1, 2008 2:24 PM

I can't read over 400 comments, but the first 100 or so gave me the idea that there was some controversy as to the creationist or evolutionist motives of the author. I've never met a creationist with that excellent a sense of humor or that level of, um, creativity. Their stuff is always ham fisted and sub-juvenile.

Posted by: Rebel 16 | April 1, 2008 3:28 PM

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." I've really enjoyed both the video and the mystery surrounding it. Very high quality concept and execution. I hope the creators do more.

Posted by: amk | April 1, 2008 4:18 PM

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.

Posted by: Carlie | April 1, 2008 5:09 PM

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

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

Posted by: BathTub | April 2, 2008 2:17 AM

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

Posted by: Torbjörn Larsson, OM | April 2, 2008 3:45 AM

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.)

Posted by: andyo | April 2, 2008 11:15 AM

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.

Posted by: DingoDave | April 3, 2008 12:08 AM

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'.

Posted by: DingoDave | April 3, 2008 12:42 AM

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.

Posted by: Tim | April 3, 2008 10:53 AM

Pure genius!
We're not worthy!
We're not worthy!
We're not worthy!

Posted by: lightning | April 3, 2008 11:21 PM

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.

Posted by: amk | April 4, 2008 4:58 PM

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?

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.

Posted by: Chrys | April 6, 2008 1:40 PM

"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.

Posted by: ennui | April 6, 2008 3:18 PM

The first link that I saw was from TheModestAgnostic.

Posted by: catta | April 6, 2008 6:06 PM

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.

Posted by: miko | April 6, 2008 11:50 PM

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.

Posted by: Thanny | April 7, 2008 4:42 AM

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.

Posted by: Roslager | April 7, 2008 8:03 AM

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.

Posted by: Parrotlover77 | April 7, 2008 6:25 PM

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.

Posted by: ReligionIsACrutch | April 9, 2008 4:42 AM

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

I think I have exposed who is responsible for this.

Posted by: JamesSp. | April 12, 2008 1:56 PM

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.

Posted by: quietthomas | April 12, 2008 10:37 PM

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!

Posted by: Jiminy Cricket | April 27, 2008 4:32 PM

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.

Posted by: Jiminy Cricket | April 28, 2008 3:13 AM

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.

Posted by: Sophia | June 4, 2008 12:12 AM

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