Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
…and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• Atheist Nexus
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
Theology-An effort to explain the unknowable by putting it into terms of the not worth knowing.
[H.L. Mencken]
Stay abreast of your favorite bloggers' latest and greatest via e-mail, via a daily digest.
« The real expulsions | Main | Radio reminder »
Category: Humor
Posted on: April 20, 2008 1:30 AM, by PZ Myers
Since we were just talking about those authoritarian science instructors, here's an example from 1956 (even older than I am!). Although I'm going to have to say that the kid is a bit snotty.
(TrackBack URL for this entry: )
YES! Send me a free issue of Seed.
If I like what I see, I'll receive 5 more issues (6 in all) for just $14.95. That's 50% off the cover price! If I'm not completely satisfied, I'll simply write "cancel" on the invoice and owe nothing. The free issue is mine to keep.
(Non-U.S. subscribers, click here.)
Comments
Very funny :)
I was a mite upset, though, how 'Mr. Science' never bothered to explain why the iron filings act as they do, or even the more detailed nature of how they act. The answer, of course, is that iron, being a magnetic material, lines up along the magnetic field lines.
Posted by: Jason Dick | April 20, 2008 1:51 AM
OK. That made everything a little bit better.
Posted by: Blake Stacey | April 20, 2008 1:54 AM
Mr.Science looks a little like Gomez Addams. Obviously no shortage of BrylCream in the 50's. And I'm impressed he's in a lab coat. You're not a proper scientist unless you're wearing lab coat....and fiddling with a Bunsen burner.
Posted by: Bride of Shrek | April 20, 2008 1:57 AM
For a guy who was legendarily funny, we don't get to see much of Ernie Kovacs these days. It's a shame. That clip is pretty hilarious. Thanks.
Steve "Just pay your taxes, Ernie!" James
Posted by: longstreet63 | April 20, 2008 2:04 AM
When he folded his hands in front of his waist I thought the whole thing was about to go very wrong.
Why is it so? on the ABC was awesome.
http://www.abc.net.au/science/features/whyisitso/
Posted by: tincture | April 20, 2008 2:20 AM
Hahaha, that magnet "experiment" that the scientist can't explain reminds me of the "experiments" performed by creationists, in the absence of any explanatory framework!
Posted by: Saint Gasoline | April 20, 2008 2:41 AM
The conifer that is older than the earth might give some cause for pause. Is it planted by the devil maybe, or was eden in Sweden?
Posted by: BadeMart | April 20, 2008 3:51 AM
Oh god that was hilarious when the experiment with the egg worked! I wonder if they had a whole bit worked out about it not working for Mr. Science.
As an aside, I wonder how many American adults today would be able to remember the principles behind these types of homemade experiments. Actually, I hated stuff like this when I was younger; all I wanted to do was read about the theory in the textbooks.
"Mr. McClure, what does DNA stand for?"
Posted by: JM Inc. | April 20, 2008 5:49 AM
#6:
It reinforces my belief that Sweden is the closest thing to paradise that you can find on Earth. LOL
Posted by: Guido | April 20, 2008 5:54 AM
Ernie Kovacs, they just don't make 'em like that anymore.
Posted by: usagi | April 20, 2008 6:11 AM
Ah, the Good Ol' Days when comedy relied on humor. I'm so jaded now, I was sure I was about to get Rick Rolled. I have to say, that egg-in-the-bottle thing was nifty-keen. I wonder if it would work with a hamster?
Posted by: UprightAlice | April 20, 2008 7:01 AM
Damn you, Tincture, I went straight to that link after watching Ernie! Steal my Show and Tell topic, will you?
Anyway, as said above, we see far too little of Mr Kovacs, who was a creative genius. Not enough room for him, what with the Next Greatest Attention Hound "reality shows" on TV.
Posted by: True Bob | April 20, 2008 7:13 AM
I remember my dad, who taught 4th grade, doing that egg experiment for his classes. I don't recall him ever trying to suck the egg back OUT, though!
Posted by: DaveX | April 20, 2008 9:23 AM
Awesome. Sometimes old TV is the best.
Posted by: GumbyTheCat | April 20, 2008 9:44 AM
If I were an authoritative professor, I'd demand all of my students refer to me as "Mr. Science."
Or "Admiral Science."
Posted by: Will K. | April 20, 2008 10:04 AM
Will K, how about "General Science"?
/laughs at own bad joke
Posted by: True Bob | April 20, 2008 10:10 AM
I think the kid would make a good scientist, most scientists were snotty kids once. Why do some filings go to the north pole and some to the south? Why don't they all go to the north pole? is it the same filings everytime? What experiment could I perform to test that?
How does the pencil write on glass? Could I make a pencil that will write on glass? What would I use?
Posted by: Quidam | April 20, 2008 10:38 AM
I used to do science demonstrations for my sons' classes, and I've done that egg thing a couple of times. It's fun when it works.
My favorite demo was making some CO2 with baking soda and vinegar, and pouring the gas into one side of a paper bag scale. It was pretty neat to watch the kids' faces as that side of the scale went down.
And I'd be pretty snotty too, if I'd been burned the week before.
Posted by: Dee | April 20, 2008 10:51 AM
The kid would've been a great scientist...keep asking until you (hopefully) get an answer.
OT, but "Laugh In" stole, borrowed, rediscovered, uh...you know, a lot of Ernie's bits and ideas.
Ernie Kovacs. I just wish I could have played poker with him. ;)
Posted by: BobbyEarle | April 20, 2008 11:00 AM
Which reminds me...
I did a science demo for my little brother once. See, you take some Drano and dump a bunch into the toilet. Then, you mix in a goodly amount of bleach.
Do not try this at home. "Sheesh, Dad, how was I supposed to know?"
Posted by: BobbyEarle | April 20, 2008 11:05 AM
Aha! You see? There are questions that scientists can't answer about magnets! This throws the whole 'theory' of magnetics into question.
I propose a new theory called "Intelligent Pushing", whereby some higher power (not sayin' who, wink wink) pushes certain things toward magnets because they are so nice and shiny. Why isn't aluminium magnetic? Cause he doesn't like aluminium for some reason. QED.
Posted by: Daniel | April 20, 2008 11:47 AM
"How come that pencil writes on glass?"
I love wax pencils. They rival Sharpies for usefulness.
Posted by: Carlie | April 20, 2008 11:59 AM
I tried a cool CO2 one with my class and they loved it...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ad1KuQlu4Fk
Posted by: ajani57 | April 20, 2008 12:33 PM
It's amazing that folks in the 50's could find time for such amusement. I mean, they all expected to die in the impending nuclear holocaust.
Posted by: Onias | April 20, 2008 1:19 PM
Onias @ #24: Yeah we did expect that, sorta. That's why we were all laughing our heads off. Cripes, I remember the whole school hiding under our desks and saying the Rosary by way of Civil Defense drill during the Cuban missile crisis, too; guess the '50s lasted that long in some ways.
But Ernie Kovacs! My early heartthrob! (One of several.) And on YouTube! Ah, the world is a wonderful place sometimes. {skip, whistle}
Bride of Shrek, you must be young. (Not that there's anything wrong with that.) Insightful, too. I had a teenage crush on the first Gomez when he was still Dickens or was it Fenster? Maybe that's why, the resemblance to Ernie. That was at least a decade later, tho'.
And I never did smoke a White Owl cigar.
Posted by: Ron Sullivan | April 20, 2008 1:46 PM
And PZ, if you were to channel Ernie, I'd buy tickets to watch. A Mr. Science picket line at the next Elpexxed opening?
Posted by: Ron Sullivan | April 20, 2008 1:49 PM
if you could put a link in your posts any time you put a YouTube video up that would be sweet - on my iPhone it wont play embeded videos but it will play YouTube videos if I click on a direct link to them.
Thanks in advance PZ! ( and as they say in radio 'long time reader, first time poster' ha)
Posted by: Luke | April 20, 2008 2:14 PM
Great video. I do think the lack of explanation with the iron filings reflects a real problem in American science education, though -- "experiments" that are really just demonstrations of well-established principles without any explanatory content. It gives a mistaken impression of what science is....
Posted by: Etha Williams | April 20, 2008 5:16 PM
Here's a short docudrama on the very same topic...kids and their natural scientific curiosity...chuckle
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwVA698Hx2g
Posted by: chriss | April 20, 2008 5:28 PM
Astin: he's Dickens and... no, that's not right. I'm Dickens he's... that's still not right. Oh, never mind.
Posted by: antaresrichard | April 20, 2008 5:33 PM
Here's some clips for those engineering and geological types too...chemists shouldn't have all the fun...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtKQpMoplYk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0dtzQBuAlE
I'll be watching those Minnesota papers...
Posted by: chriss | April 20, 2008 5:36 PM
Well it isn't Mr. Science, but here's a blend of mechanical destruction and chemical reaction:
http://www.willitblend.com/videos.aspx?type=unsafe&video=glowsticks
Posted by: True Bob | April 20, 2008 5:53 PM
Bet the kid grew up to be a top-notch scientist. Just look at those nerd glasses. 8-)
Posted by: themadlolscientist | April 20, 2008 6:36 PM
"I propose a new theory called "Intelligent Pushing", whereby some higher power (not sayin' who, wink wink) pushes certain things toward magnets...",/i>
Nah, Pratchett beat you to it. It's called the Love of Iron.
Posted by: NoniMausa | April 20, 2008 7:07 PM
Damnation! This is what I get for choosing Adams over Pratchett in my misspent youth.
Posted by: Daniel | April 20, 2008 8:21 PM
I'm surprised nobody has followed up with this incarnation of Mr. Science yet.
Posted by: David F. | April 20, 2008 10:01 PM
re: #36 - oopsie - looks like the URL didn't appear in the URL field...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=GFPuo8s4Ywc
Posted by: David F. | April 20, 2008 10:03 PM
Can't stop watching that Kovacs clip.
The announcer in that clip is Bill Wendell, who was for many years the announcer for "Late Night With David Letterman" on NBC.
But here's the zinger...
There is a rumor in the Youtube comments that "Johnny" may be a very young Christopher Walken.
"Walken entered the planet Showbiz when he was a year old, by the time Christopher was 7, he did walk-ons, catalogue modeling. Between regular appearances at 'Ernie Kovacs', 'Philco TV Playhouse', 'The Colgate Comedy Hour', and a series called The Wonderful John Acton, as Kevin Actons."
http://www.netglimse.com/celebs/pages/christopher_walken/index.shtml
Posted by: David F. | April 20, 2008 11:51 PM
@UprightAlice #11
Sure it'll work. But you have to shave and grease it first.
Science is FUN!
Posted by: Yossarian | April 20, 2008 11:52 PM
P.Z., I could not use reply to make the following:
Do you dissent from Eugenies C.Scott's assertion that when certain scientists maintain there is no cosmic teleology, that they are making a philosophical pointl rather than a scientific fact. I follow Weisz in "The Science of Biology," that science finds causalism rather than teleology at work." End states are consequences [ I say causal] not foregone conclusions of beginning states[ teleology."Otherwise, one " explains an end state by simply asserting it given at the beginning. And in thereby putting the future into the past, the effect before the cause,teleology negates time."
I take this finding to find that causal natural selection thus contradicts teleological God and thus, theistic evolution is an oxymoron. Selection is its own boss,not needing Super Boss and at cross position with it. Otherwise, the new Omphalos argument ensues that there is deception, which is that selection merely follows out the it had to be plans of God at work.
And furthermore, all teleology - fine-tuning, probability, from reason and design- beg the question that Super Boss had us in mind rather than we are the products of natural causes, the sufficient reason, contrary to Leibniz..
Please,P.Z., set me straight on this! Thanks for all your work and any response to this.
Thanks, Morgan-LynnGriggs Lamberth [ skeptic griggsy]
Posted by: Morgan-LynnGriggs Lamberth | April 21, 2008 12:30 AM
Interesting point, griggsy.
I get annoyed when believers try to sneak in god by using theistic evolution. I've been searching for the right way to knock that one down. Now I can say, "But evolution is atelic."
They'll probably just look at me funny, but they do anyway.
Posted by: Daniel | April 21, 2008 1:57 AM
"We're going to need another Timmy!"
Posted by: CortxVortx | April 21, 2008 10:36 AM
OK, it's the whole next day and nobody's stepped in to say, "It was Dutch Masters cigars, you stoopit biatch!"
I Am Officially The Geezer Here.
Posted by: Ron Sullivan | April 21, 2008 12:26 PM
kid looks like a young (very young) ben stein
Posted by: gwyllion | April 21, 2008 2:16 PM
Ernie was always quite the scientist - cf. his brilliantly insightful commentary on evolution:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Uw03hS_EMY
Posted by: Libby | April 21, 2008 9:09 PM
Huh... I just scanned all the comments, and am I the only person who thought of xkcd?
Seriously great times.
Also, "experiments in a can" are tasty.
Posted by: D | April 21, 2008 11:02 PM