Photographic evidence!
Category: Humor
Posted on: March 24, 2008 7:37 PM, by PZ Myers
I'm glad somebody remembered to document the recent looney events photographically. Although I don't remember Genie being there…
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
Search this blog
Profile
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
…and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• Atheist Nexus
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
I reserve the right to publicly post, with full identifying information about the source, any email sent to me that contains threats of violence.
Random Quote
(Complete listing)Many New Testament scholars have observed that the conception of the resurrection body implied in 1 Corinthians 15 clashes so violently with that presupposed in the gospels that the latter must be dismissed as secondary embellishments, especially as 1 Corinthians predates the gospels.
Robert M. Price, "By This Time He Stinketh"
Recent Posts
- My interweb poll-fu is defeated!
- Say…what about Molly?
- Party details!
- Madison details
- Our bright and glorious future
- Darwin movie in the works?
- I'm green here
- Friday Cephalopod: Three phyla
- Another Pharyngubrunch
- Jon Stewart is brilliant
A Taste of Pharyngula
(Complete listing)Recent Comments
- Scott from Oregon on Jon Stewart is brilliant
- Bert Chadick on Say…what about Molly?
- yoeruek on Say…what about Molly?
- Lok on Say…what about Molly?
- truth machine, OM on Say…what about Molly?
- Rev. BigDumbChimp, KoT on My interweb poll-fu is defeated!
- SC on Jon Stewart is brilliant
- Scott from Oregon on Jon Stewart is brilliant
- BMcP on Poll…but you'll have to see Ken Ham's homely face to do it
- SC on Jon Stewart is brilliant
Archives
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
Blogroll
(Complete listing)Other Information
Subscribe via Email
Stay abreast of your favorite bloggers' latest and greatest via e-mail, via a daily digest.
« Oh. My. Dog. | Main | Another Expelled roundup »
TrackBacks
(TrackBack URL for this entry: )
Comments
I like Chris Mooney talking with cartoon word balloons. It puts him in the proper context.
Posted by: Will K. | March 24, 2008 7:46 PM
I like it.
Posted by: Moses | March 24, 2008 7:46 PM
300 references are getting old. Seriously. Good otherwise.
Posted by: Alex | March 24, 2008 7:47 PM
Ok, I knew about Chris Mooney -- but oh my gosh Matt Nesbit is cute too!
"He came with the frame."
Posted by: Sastra | March 24, 2008 7:52 PM
Sastra @#4:
LOL! Too true! And like all pictures that come with the frame, he's destined for the garbage pail ... er ... recycling bin.I'll be chuckling over this comment for days. Thanks, Sastra.
βPer
Posted by: bPer | March 24, 2008 8:11 PM
Hmm, I heard Genie was in a thong and you and Dawkins where dressed in black leather with horns growing out of your heads. But, I could be wrong.
Posted by: firemancarl | March 24, 2008 8:13 PM
That's Nesbit?!!
I thought he was some old geezer! (No offence meant to old geezers and geezettes ... geeztrixes? ... geeztrices? ... geezices? ... )
Don't judge a book by its cover &c &c &c, but ... if I had any doubt left about whether to try to find out more about the man (boy? man-boy?) and his idea(s), they've evaporated now.
Posted by: Sili | March 24, 2008 8:13 PM
I do believe we've discovered our next frame: "Great hair, Chris." "Great hair, Matt."
If it's not too late, you could update the "I'm supposed to sit down and shut up" post to replace "Fuck you very much" with "Great hair, Matt."
Posted by: HP | March 24, 2008 8:38 PM
I'm uncomfortable with this type of sycophantic creation.
Posted by: Rick | March 24, 2008 8:41 PM
i can assure you there was no adoration of nesbit at work at any point during the creation of the comic...
Posted by: Rick MacPherson | March 24, 2008 8:48 PM
Yes, but of course I meant sycophantic towards the rationalists.
Posted by: Rick | March 24, 2008 8:50 PM
Jeez, man... How did you get to be such good friends with Richard Dawkins?
Posted by: Tom Fulton | March 24, 2008 9:13 PM
I think this comic is poor framing.
Surely people will take one look at Matt's hair and see it as final proof of intelligent design! Hari looking that good can't happen by chance!
Posted by: Brendan S | March 24, 2008 9:22 PM
Much is being made of this expelled debacle, but I wonder if there is not a sinister plot here - basically to make a lot of money. Imagine you are the film maker of expelled - you want to stir things up, get some press (in the NYT) and get lots of people talking about your flick. Kicking a prominent atheist out of your movie, while allowing an even more prominent one in might do the trick. You want to get folks all worked up before the movie comes out.
Now the atheists are talking about it - any many will go and see it. The IDers are going to go and see it - if only because the evolutionists have trash talked it so much.
At the end of the day, Ben Stein and crew made a 3rd rate documentary and get to laugh all the way to the bank. I bet they don't even care a damn about the ID - evolution debate.
Of course I could be wrong, but its probably worth considering in between all the high fives we are giving each other. Think about it - who is going to get the last laugh?
Posted by: Richard | March 24, 2008 9:24 PM
#14:
I doubt it was staged by them. I think they would have had their story straight from the beginning if they were really trying to drum something up. Plus all the 'mainstream' news outlets seem to carry PZ's version.
And, in the bigger picture... so what? I think this fight is about science, and facts. And how belief cannot change facts. ID is a belief that goes against facts.
These events serve to cast the proponents of Intelligent Design in the light we know their true natures to be. That is, as dishonest, hypocritical petty whiners. THIS IS GOOD. Even if they make some extra money, science, and truth, win in the end.
Posted by: Brendan S | March 24, 2008 9:32 PM
#14 -
You think we have power we don't have, and you ignore the power we do.
Posted by: inkadu | March 24, 2008 9:49 PM
Funny, but... honestly, do you think that Richard Dawkins has ever once in his life said "blimey"? "Crikey", maybe...
Posted by: William | March 24, 2008 9:54 PM
Who the heck does Denyse O'Leary think she is?
Taken from her multiple self-promoting blogs:
I have myself attempted to resolve Myers's expulsion problem by paying for his ticket, if he will agree to watch the whole film, and not run out to trash it halfway through or something similar. I have e-mailed producer Mark Mathis with my offer. It will likely cost me US$8.00 or so, and my freelance writing business can easily spring for it.
What a complete tool. Here's a thought, Denyse. Maybe it's not that PZ is bitter about having to pay for a ticket, but maybe he and others simply find the whole incident hilariously ironic. I wouldn't call it an uproar, although you and your fellow creationists are a riot. Yes, we know your career promoting pseudoscience, link-farming and preaching to the choir earns you enough dough to pay for a movie ticket, but maybe you should first buy yourself a clue.
Posted by: xcdesignproponentsists | March 24, 2008 10:32 PM
Question: Does Nesmith or Nebbish or whatever the name is of the self-appointed concern troll have any fame outside of being an attacker of PZ? Seriously, I'd never heard of the guy until I started reading Pharyngula. Is he just some kind of energy creature, hoping to get publicity from asinine attacks on his betters, operating on the "Ha! Made ya looook!" principle?
Posted by: Phoenix Woman | March 24, 2008 10:37 PM
Great job there - the full series is excellent!
But where's PZ's Trophy WifeTM in that?
[aside: The *public* photo I've seen of PZ and said Trophy WifeTM on one of his webpages communicates sheer joyfulness about family and living in a nice town like Morris - it belies those that believe PZ is a some mean grumpy man - well yes he is that way with dipsticks, boo hoo.].
Posted by: szqc | March 25, 2008 12:17 AM
Dawkins is British- of course he says "blimey". Constantly.
But where's his monocle? :c
Posted by: Karley | March 25, 2008 12:39 AM
That's Nesbit?!!
Hello sugar daddy supporting a soup restaurant?!
Posted by: MAJeff, OM | March 25, 2008 12:44 AM
Richard: many will see it while it's free. But I'll be damned (talk about unlikely!) before I give those clowns one thin dime of my money, and I think many other people feel likewise.
So I'm not at all sure it'll lead to making any money.
Posted by: Cdesign opponentist | March 25, 2008 1:20 AM
Too bad PZ &Co. missed the preview of the prequel :
http://adamant.typepad.com
Posted by: Russell Seitz | March 25, 2008 2:48 AM
I was there! The sound of one hand clapping was the time I carried you with my other hand because I'm super buff.
Posted by: October Mermaid | March 25, 2008 3:13 AM
PZ:
I've been doing so digging about the production company behind 'Expelled' and I talk about what I've found here.
As always, I'd appreciate any feedback or other input from your readership. Every now and then I find things of interest, that might profit by being better-known.
BTW, while 'ExpelledGate' is getting some airplay here and there as a label for recent events, I've decided to just call it 'PZX'.
Posted by: Scott Hatfield, OM | March 25, 2008 3:16 AM
Really, who cares? We're worried about whether this movie will seriously damage public perception of science, not about whether it will make money. If 500 million people go and watch it, and most of them come away laughing about how stupid creationists are, I will happily congratulate Stein and Mathis on their now being rich enough to buy Estonia. In fact, in that case I'd like them to make a sequel or two.
Posted by: Anton Mates | March 25, 2008 3:26 AM
#27 - "I will happily congratulate Stein and Mathis on their now being rich enough to buy Estonia."
Well, being an Estonian, I strongly resent that notion. We have our own crackpots here...
But since our current government is talking about mandatory religion studies in high school and our foreign minister has an history of selling out to megacompanies (read: Microsoft) it is not entirely impossible...
Posted by: Ray D. Noper | March 25, 2008 4:37 AM
For the love of (something important)!
Can we please get off this, "talking about it will make people see it", idea? I know too many people think tv cliche is real life, but damn.
Imagine Ben Stein is exposed having sex with a sheep. He'll be all over the news. But that does not equal buzz for his latest movie. It equals at best "Sheep fucker Ben Stein (who's latest film before fucking sheep was Expelled), was found fucking sheep today..."
More to the point, would a pacifist, filming a doc. on pacifism, sell more tickets if he attacked someone? If the producers of a doc. on academic freedom started turning away dissenters, do you think they would benefit? It's like talking about the plagiarism of those recent scientists and expecting their work to be more successful within the scientific community, or even by the public at large, simply because we're talking about it and bringing it into the spot light. But it isn't, because plagiarism undercuts the very reason anyone would take such scientists seriously. This is about credibility. How much more HTML must a guy use before we get this idea?
This is bad press (this much HTML in case you were wondering). What is being reported undercuts the very talking points made by the producers. Hearing that Expelled is expelling people and are thus hypocrites: Is. Not. Enticing. The papers have reported them as a joke headline producing group - The public sees them as a joke headline producing group. If you think this works in their favor, you must be in communications.
Quit watching tv. Read a book.
Posted by: Michael X | March 25, 2008 4:42 AM
Hilarious comic! It is always great to start the day with a chuckle. :)
Posted by: Sam | March 25, 2008 6:35 AM
I have to say, I've just read the NYT coverage of this "affair", and I'm struggling to see what PZ has achieved here. The NYT article makes PZ look as stupid at Ben Stein, like they're having some kind of playground fight: "On those facts, everybody agrees. After that, things break down."
Frankly, this affair will (like Dawkins himself, as much as I love his writing) have precisely 0% effect on the debate over creationism in the U.S., let alone elsewhere.
I don't agree with Nisbet, before people get their knickers in a twist, but PZ, I wish you would reach outside the comfort zone of writing to your own friendly blog audience or attacking nutters (both very easy), and actually put some of this effort into targeting the average American on the street. At the moment, it seems like you're just playing to the opposite poles of the debate.
Posted by: Martin | March 25, 2008 7:05 AM
We're ignoring the really important question here.
Did Skatje save PZ any Charleston Chews, or did he have to make do with the stale popcorn stuck in her pant cuff?
Posted by: MorpheusPA | March 25, 2008 7:19 AM
People get the message about creationism/evolution and other science issues in various ways which is why we need people working in various areas of the media. Since Pharyngula is an extremely popular science blog, it is just one effective way to get science information out. What I find especially cool about Pharyngula is the vibrant community of commenters. Although blog readers are self-selected, there is a lot they can do, and probably do, when inspired to promote science themselves. I know a lot of "average Americans on the street," and I'm a regular Pharyngula reader who tries to spread the word to the average American on the street.
Posted by: Hilda | March 25, 2008 7:30 AM
@Hilda
I don't disagree with you at all, it just frustrates me that the SB crowd are acting like this is a Big Deal when really it isn't, and the coverage of it in the NYT article was quite bad for us.
Posted by: Martin | March 25, 2008 7:56 AM
I've never heard Dawkins speak, but am sure that he would say "blimey". In fact, in my head he sounds just like Wooster, from Wooster and Jeeves.
Posted by: Dahan | March 25, 2008 8:17 AM
Nice hair, Martin.
Posted by: stogoe | March 25, 2008 8:56 AM
Unlikely. 'Blimey' is very lower-class and Dawkins is, if not a toff, then certainly upper-middle class gent with an RP accent.
So, 'blimey', no. However, 'crikey' is another matter entirely.
Posted by: Lee Brimmicombe-Wood | March 25, 2008 9:03 AM
my only problem with this cartoon is the belittling of Genie.
Posted by: rb | March 25, 2008 9:18 AM
"Blimey" and "crikey" are right out for Bertie Wooster. Jeeves would give his notice.
But Jeeves and Wooster are beside the point. We're supposed to be fans of evidence here. Clearly what's needed is for PZ to ask Dawkins if he ever uses those expressions and report back. We must know!
And indeed, Expelledgate isn't really a big deal (like we need more evidence creationists are fools), but it is a lot of fun. Not as much fun as Jeeves and Wooster, mind, but a lot of fun nonetheless.
Posted by: Mike from Ottawa | March 25, 2008 9:20 AM
& where's that coexistent dinosaur? wait let me load photoshop ...
Posted by: ddan | March 25, 2008 10:11 AM
300 references
I first parsed this as 300 references (as in references given in an academic paper) rather than 300 references (as in, references to the film) and was puzzled by the lack of references at the end of the cartoon. Also I read "Charlston Chews" as "Charlston Heston Chews". Sigmund Freud could make a lot out of those two slips no doubt.
Posted by: Dianne | March 25, 2008 10:22 AM
Skatje seems to be reduced to a fetch-and-carry role. Don't think she'll go for that.
Posted by: Reginald Selkirk | March 25, 2008 10:50 AM
that genie and skatje are played-up for humor was just comic license... i've never met skatje, but if she was offended i'd happily add a bubble... maybe even a hand holding a box of charleston chews... it's just a cartoon, after all, and is based on some precedent... in real life, veronica was not as shallow and vain as illustrated in archie... and i believe jughead was finishing his dissertation through most of the strip's run...
Posted by: Rick MacPherson | March 25, 2008 12:03 PM
I can't understand why PZ didn't comment on the use of the word "cuddly" to describe him. It is obviously the most far-fetched part of the comic.
Posted by: David vun Kannon | March 25, 2008 12:48 PM
Shouldn't there have been a beak and a radula inside that mouth in the last frame?
Posted by: BaldApe | March 25, 2008 7:04 PM
PZ,
You really need to start smiling more in photos. You're in danger of becoming the Victoria Beckham of science. Besides, I bet you have really nice teeth.
Posted by: Bride of Shrek | March 26, 2008 1:57 AM
Posh-Zed Myers?!?
Posted by: Kseniya | March 26, 2008 5:05 PM
Dianne (#41), it's okay, I wrote that and when I just reread it I was wondering what I was talking about too. Should have used italics.
Posted by: Alex | March 26, 2008 11:33 PM
Oh, hell, there goes my heuristic. I thought "crikey" was Australian, not English.
But what the hell do I know, anyway--that damn gecko in the Geico ads is supposed to be Cockney, but I swear he sounds just like the Aussie programmer guy in my old lab. /tin ear
Posted by: thalarctos | March 26, 2008 11:47 PM
Ditto.
Posted by: Kseniya | March 27, 2008 12:12 AM
fck y ll
Posted by: arqam | April 15, 2008 2:12 AM
mthr fckrs .y r ll sn f btchs
[expect more of this as the creationists get fired up by the bad movie. -pzm]
Posted by: arqam | April 15, 2008 2:14 AM