Discover Magazine announced a contest to create a two-minute video explanation of evolution many months ago, and we finally have a winner. All five of the entries are good, so go to the link and watch them all!
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
Search
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)
• Quick link to the latest endless thread
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
It is very important not to mistake hemlock for parsley, but to believe or not believe in God is not important at all.
[Denis Diderot]
Recent Posts
- Evolution: How We and All Living Things Came to Be
- How can we not?
- List of science blogs, with an asterisk
- I'm having bad acid flashbacks, man
- That sneaky, nasty blasphemy law
- Rise up, Texans!
- Nice euphemism
- Dutch poll needs a little help
- But he doesn't know my mom
- I'm home!
A Taste of Pharyngula
Recent Comments
- Something Arbitrary on List of science blogs, with an asterisk
- Mak on How can we not?
- Tulse on How can we not?
- a_ray_in_dilbert_space on List of science blogs, with an asterisk
- RickR on The Creation “Museum”
- blf on List of science blogs, with an asterisk
- Something Arbitrary on List of science blogs, with an asterisk
- creating trons on Nice euphemism
- Sven DiMilo on A reasonable deconversion
- JackC on Evolution: How We and All Living Things Came to Be
Archives
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- 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
Other Information
« The cameraman speaks | Main | Correcting Ken Ham's standard omission »
Evolution in two minutes
Category: Communicating science • Evolution • Science
Posted on: November 9, 2009 11:54 AM, by PZ Myers
Find more posts in: 
Life Science
Share this: Facebook Twitter Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More
TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/124366
Comments
Posted by: PGPWNIT | November 9, 2009 11:59 AM
Congrats!
Posted by: B166ER | November 9, 2009 12:14 PM
The sad thing is that two minutes goes beyond the attention span of your average IDiot/Creotard by a good 1:45... Great idea though, because a lot of people with slightly longer attention spans can get a decent little primer into what evolution REALLY is. I wonder if anyone watches the videos and asks themselves:
"But how long did it take for the "first" male of the species to find the "first" female?"
::facepalm::
Well, besides Ray Comfort I mean.
P.S. Is vox having problems or is it just me?
No Gods, No Masters
Cameron
Posted by: Matt H. | November 9, 2009 12:17 PM
I always get confused about this magazine. Don't the Discovery Institute (an ID 'thinktank') also run a monthly propaganda piece called 'Discover Magazine'?
Posted by: ellenjanuary | November 9, 2009 12:19 PM
I don't know, man... Stephen Anderson, zooming in on the galaxy stew with the "let's begin with evolution is not..." I'm still laughing. That one says it all for me. Thanks. ;)
Posted by: Glen Davidson | November 9, 2009 12:28 PM
That's still a lot longer than than it takes to say, "No, that's impossible, god did it."
Creationism always wins in the race for simple-mindedness.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
Posted by: ellenjanuary | November 9, 2009 12:29 PM
Discovery mag, is; if I'm not mistaken, science for the young.
Sorry, I couldn't resist... I would have started right from chapter two that causes all the trouble. Drew some monkeys on the chalkboard, "Is this god?" Some sponges, some fish, some palm trees... "How about this?" Then zoomed out on the galaxy stew. "No, this is god. Transposing a sentence to see what the old grouch looks like, that's all you, I'm sleeping well tonight...
Got the book by Edward Larson. Peppered moth on the cover, end of story; case closed. Some people are just afraid to learn. You do good work. Thanks again.
Posted by: Eshto | November 9, 2009 12:31 PM
That. Was. Awful.
My ears bleed.
Posted by: Carlie | November 9, 2009 12:48 PM
I thought they were great! Shame there were so few entries, though. I'd love to assign my evolution class students a project like that, but then it comes up against the idea that they're being tested on things outside the course material (ability to make video, graphic design skills, etc.) and I haven't quite figured out how to sidestep that.
Posted by: ouch | November 9, 2009 12:53 PM
Amen Eshto. Scientists should not attempt to be rock stars. let the coolness of the science speak for itself. Don't you know? Geeky is the new cool!!
You lost me when he picked up the guitar and started umm...jamming?
kudos on the good intentions though.
Posted by: Matt Penfold | November 9, 2009 1:05 PM
When I worked in IT at a University a similar project was done as a collaboration between a course on digital design and one on marine science. The science students were paired with design students into groups of four. It seemed to work well, with the science students deciding what the message should be and the design students finding a way to achieve that in medium of computer based art.
Posted by: NewEnglandBob
|
November 9, 2009 1:19 PM
It is not a song I will go around humming, but it does the job. So do the other 4. Congratulations to all.
Posted by: Sigmund | November 9, 2009 1:25 PM
Teachers as rock stars are a bit like parents as dance instructors. Its not that the song itself (or the performance) was bad but its just that almost every geeky video that uses modern rock and/or roll music to illustrate their subject manages to distract me by their very middle of the road blandness.
By the way, Scott Hatfield?
Isn't he a regular here, he even has an Order of Molly, doesn't he?
Posted by: daijiyobu | November 9, 2009 2:00 PM
Guinness has a good one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9L4MOHpOLWo
Strangely not shown in the U.S., I believe.
-r.c.
Posted by: Scott Hatfield, OM
|
November 9, 2009 2:00 PM
Yes, and yes. It's very gratifying to even be considered with the other four.
Posted by: Larsus | November 9, 2009 2:07 PM
I really like QualiaSoup's YouTube-channel where he explains evolution very clearly: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vss1VKN2rf8
It is 10 minutes long, but for a concept so fundamental and important you just need a bit more time.
Posted by: RamblinDude
|
November 9, 2009 2:58 PM
These are all worthy attempts, but unfortunately, there’s nothing that will be persuasive to my fundy friends and relatives.
I still think it can be done, however, and I have hopes that it will be.
Posted by: Kim Hosey (AZ Writer) | November 9, 2009 3:23 PM
I don't know if geeky being cool is all that new.
I thought it was a pretty worthy effort.
Posted by: Ben | November 9, 2009 3:28 PM
Not as good as this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faRlFsYmkeY
Posted by: Kim Hosey (AZ Writer) | November 9, 2009 3:30 PM
Also, I had two teachers who routinely broke into song in the science classroom in high school; it's actually pretty useful in remembering the order of things. I seem to remember pretty catchy tunes about the reproductive and digestive systems and one about something to do with trinitrotoluene (admirably worked into lyrics in its full form). I think the song entry deserves to win for memorability for sure.
Also also, thanks a lot #15: I'm now working my way through QualiaSoup's channel rather than getting work done. There's some quality stuff there.
Posted by: James F | November 9, 2009 3:31 PM
Sigmund #12,
Yes indeed, that's Scott Hatfield, OM.
Posted by: Kim Hosey (AZ Writer) | November 9, 2009 3:35 PM
#18: Definitely a classic. Only, now we'll run back into the problem of morons who take it a little too literally, argue that a fish can't will itself to land, and walk away brushing their hands as if that disproves evolution.
Posted by: Kel, OM | November 9, 2009 3:45 PM
Nice work there Scott.
Posted by: Kristjan Wager | November 9, 2009 3:59 PM
Congratulations Scott. I, for one, liked it.
Posted by: Newfie
|
November 9, 2009 4:48 PM
Congratulations, Scott.. well done Sir.
three points:
1. They were all very well done.
2. I thought "Why Elephants Do Not Have Wings" offered the best explanation in such a short time.
3. I will not be asking PZ for musical recommendations. :P
Sorry, Scott.. ;)
Posted by: Lucem | November 9, 2009 8:10 PM
Scott - I loved the video! Congratulations! Now the tune is caught in my head. Have you tried the song with your class?
Posted by: Ross | November 9, 2009 10:33 PM
I'm sorry, that was not a good combination of music and science. The science might have been OK, but I couldn't listen long enough to decide. For future reference, maybe you could hire this woman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZ-1lfammjk
Posted by: Levi in NY | November 10, 2009 12:31 AM
I also enjoyed Scott's song. Well done, sir!
Posted by: Rorschach | November 10, 2009 2:59 AM
Why, it's Scott Hatfield !
Congrats, nice work !
Although for this to be hip with the kids it would have had to be sung by Miley Cyrus or so...:-)
Posted by: Scott Hatfield, OM
|
November 10, 2009 6:26 AM
I've had some folk email me requesting the lyrics or questions about the contest, etc. You can find that stuff on my blog here.
Thanks to one and all for the feedback!
Posted by: Word Slinger | November 10, 2009 10:32 AM
I can't believe you're still spouting that overpopulation/struggle for existence/survival of the fittest crap.
Are you stuck in the 19th century?
Posted by: Researcher, Chef, Cook & BottleWasher | November 27, 2009 8:56 PM
"The mind of the bigot is like the pupil of the eye; the more light you pour upon it, the more it will contract". Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr
Don't waste time trying to convince people. Just try to reach the kids.
Posted by: baju
|
February 1, 2010 1:56 PM
I seem to remember pretty catchy tunes about the reproductive and digestive systems and one about something to do with trinitrotoluene