1. Comment #151514 by Aaron on March 28, 2008 at 11:22 pm

Werd

Other Comments by Aaron

2. Comment #151533 by Big T on March 29, 2008 at 12:16 am

I got a good laugh out of it.

Other Comments by Big T

3. Comment #151535 by riki on March 29, 2008 at 12:20 am

So who was the Creator? Obviously not a Creationist. Well done!!

Other Comments by riki

4. Comment #151544 by Richard Dawkins on March 29, 2008 at 12:44 am

If anyone can understand a single word of this, don't bother to translate, just tell me whose side it's on. I get the feeling (same with South Park) that there are people out there who assume that something that is obviously MEANT to be funny therefore must BE funny, and they immediately shower it with accolades such as "Wow", "Hilarious", "Awesome" and, most side-splitting of all, "LOL".

Sorry, I seem to be showing my age. Enjoy yourselves LOLling away.

Richard

Other Comments by Richard Dawkins

5. Comment #151546 by Steve Zara on March 29, 2008 at 12:49 am

Comment #151544 by Richard Dawkins

just tell me whose side it's on.

Maybe I am showing my age too, but I found it too embarassing to watch for long, and have no clue as to the "angle".

It is sad that Tom Lehrer retired, I say.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

6. Comment #151550 by KristianForselv on March 29, 2008 at 12:59 am

*claps hands* very well made video ;)

Aside from the intro, I Can't really see any anti-anything in the rap.

Would it be possible to get a rap-response from "Dr.D and the 4 horsemen" ? :-)

Other Comments by KristianForselv

7. Comment #151551 by dancingthemantaray on March 29, 2008 at 1:01 am

Well...it tickled my funny bone..

Other Comments by dancingthemantaray

8. Comment #151553 by mmarietta on March 29, 2008 at 1:09 am

Comment #51 at pharyngula has the lyrics: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/03/if_you_heard_my_voice_you_know.php#comments

Seems rather pro-science to me.

Other Comments by mmarietta

9. Comment #151555 by dancingthemantaray on March 29, 2008 at 1:18 am

Does it matter either way? It's funny and well done....

Other Comments by dancingthemantaray

10. Comment #151572 by riki on March 29, 2008 at 2:18 am

It's pro science, pro dick in an irreverent way that would appeal to younger, hipper audiences. It's linked up on Bad Astronomy as well http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2008/03/28/creationism-thats-a-rap/

Other Comments by riki

11. Comment #151583 by Clive on March 29, 2008 at 2:44 am

BEST THING SINCE LIFE OF BRIAN !!!

When's the movie coming out?

Other Comments by Clive

12. Comment #151585 by Mal3 on March 29, 2008 at 2:51 am

I got a good chuckle out of Hitchen's headband.

Other Comments by Mal3

13. Comment #151587 by Philip1978 on March 29, 2008 at 3:03 am

Richard,

I am as confused as you are about this video and I have the mind of an adolescent tucked away in this 29 year old head of mine!

What the hell was that all about?

Philip

Other Comments by Philip1978

14. Comment #151589 by AllanW on March 29, 2008 at 3:09 am

I think there are enough pro-science lyrics in it to think it rests on 'our' side. Plus the visuals are quite ironic in many cases. I can understand a little confusion but I put that down to muddled and mangled use of the language (which I believe is normal for this kind of music). On the whole it's entertaining IMO.

I think I'll have a hard time getting the image of Eugenie Scott rubbing her bikini-clad (and plainly male) body out of my head ...

Other Comments by AllanW

15. Comment #151591 by Eventhorizon on March 29, 2008 at 3:10 am

I think what they are taking the piss out of is the argument between atheist and the religious. It seems they think both sides are making claims they cant back up (although we know different). They took some time on the lyrics though - I couldnt rhyme like that.

Other Comments by Eventhorizon

16. Comment #151595 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on March 29, 2008 at 3:30 am

I'm fairly certain this is pro, the lyrics are pretty unequivocal, and damn it is funny. There is also a high quality torrent here http://www.mininova.org/tor/1278276

If you liked the YT version, you'll love this. Any idea yet you did it?


The semi-authoritative lyric transcript:

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 more dollars than 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!

Other Comments by briancoughlanworldcitizen

17. Comment #151598 by MHA on March 29, 2008 at 3:34 am

Cool song. Not my cup of tea though, I like my music a little bit heavier. I got the idea that it is pro sciense and could actually appeal to younger population. I guess that's pretty cool drug against religious indoctrination that our schools are full of nowdays. :)

Other Comments by MHA

18. Comment #151601 by lievemebe on March 29, 2008 at 3:38 am

I could not separate irony from misconception from pro-science in this clip. I am utterly confused about its intent. Perhaps it is Part I.

Other Comments by lievemebe

19. Comment #151603 by jaytee_555 on March 29, 2008 at 3:41 am

Like Prof Dawkins, (and the same age as him) I couldn't understand a word of it. In any case, I hate rap, considering it a form of sound for people who have difficulties with music. However, I was pleasantly surprised when I read the 'translation' and realised that whoever wrote the words was pretty well informed. The whole thing is professional and well-produced, and seemed to me to be more of a clever, studied rap 'piss-take' than anything else - likely to go over the heads of anyone who isn't familiar with the subject matter. Not my cup of tea, though obviously popular with a lot of posters on this site...and it helps the cause.

Other Comments by jaytee_555

20. Comment #151604 by Artful_Dodger on March 29, 2008 at 3:50 am

Fantastic! The funniest piss-take I've seen for ages! Well done, and thanks for posting it.

Other Comments by Artful_Dodger

21. Comment #151606 by Geoff on March 29, 2008 at 3:54 am

I must be getting old. Even reading the transcript didn't help. Perhaps wooter could translate?

Other Comments by Geoff

22. Comment #151615 by hmcook87 on March 29, 2008 at 4:09 am

Its either an attempt to "discredit" science, or a clever parody of the creationist position. The beginning of the video, containing the words "ministry of science propaganda" and the "expulsion" of a scientist for failing to see natural selection occurring in a microscope certainly portrays the creationist take on things. But the rest of the video portrays the scientific side as such awesome badasses that if it is designed to discredit it does a very ineffective job.

Other Comments by hmcook87

23. Comment #151618 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on March 29, 2008 at 4:20 am

I must be getting old. Even reading the transcript didn't help. Perhaps wooter could translate?

Wot!!?

There are all sorts of clever references to pivotal points in the reason vs faith wars.

The discussion about worldview among Greek philosophers.
Willam Palleys "Divine Watchmaker".
Darwins journey to the Gallapagos.
Huxley kicking Bishop Wilberforces ass.
The Scopes trial.
The unstoppable rise of science and reason, most recently personified by Dawkins "posse" PZ, Harris, Hitchens, Dennett and Eugenie Scott.

It's parody sure, but the overall message seems to be pro science. The heaviest exaggeration is for the business with scientists being expelled. The "machine" is real, it is the scientific method which has become as inexorable as evolution itself. If you spout bullshit, you WILL eventually be expelled, because your more grounded and sensible peers will no longer see you as a valuable or useful collaborator. However, if thats a conspiracy so is basic human nature.

Other Comments by briancoughlanworldcitizen

24. Comment #151624 by _J_ on March 29, 2008 at 4:34 am

hmcook87 - Yes!

I guiltily enjoyed that. On the surface of it, its anti-science/'New Atheism' position is tripe. But it's so well done, with so much attention to detail, so many little jokes - it just displays more care and wit than any of the usual (careless and witless) attempts at pro-religious satire.

Maybe we're all just flattering ourselves in thinking 'If they're canny enough to make a slick video like this, they must be on "our side" really'. It's genuinely hard to tell - the whole thing's so steeped in irony that you can't say for sure which 'level' it stops at - who's spoofing whom.

Like Richard, it reminds me of South Park, but for a different reason. South Park will gleefully savage both sides of an argument, grabbing its laughs from satirising all camps. You can't say for sure who is supposed to be the butt of this joke, but you can appreciate the execution of it, and you can be willing to laugh at yourself. The people who fall foul of this kind of satire are those who get uppity about the whole thing and either dismiss it all as rubbish (it is well done, even if it isn't to everyone's taste) or take serious offence to it.

You gotta take it on the chin like Bobby De Niro...

Other Comments by _J_

25. Comment #151625 by Geoff on March 29, 2008 at 4:35 am

Yes Brian, sorry, I meant the language, not the content.

Other Comments by Geoff

26. Comment #151628 by Dr Benway on March 29, 2008 at 4:51 am

Richard, I think this is a compliment.

Young people can't express their admiration toward you as they might toward a rock star or sports hero without feeling conflicted about that. Being a fan is a little too close to playing the syncophant, which you just can't do if you view yourself as an independent thinker.

So the admiration must be tempered with a bit of humiliation. All the best teachers get this sort of treatment from each new generation of students.

Other Comments by Dr Benway

27. Comment #151629 by Mark Smith on March 29, 2008 at 4:58 am

I think it is a very well done entertaining piece (if you like 'that sort of thing' - I can understand why some do not). As with most 'art', it is ambiguous and can be interpreted a number of ways. In a sense, I think it laughs at both sides of the argument, and that isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Edit: I think Dr Benway above probably has it right also.

Other Comments by Mark Smith

28. Comment #151636 by bitbutter on March 29, 2008 at 5:33 am

I agree with themodestagnostic's Youtube comment here:

I'm thinking it's pro Dawkins now. It starts off sounding pro expelled, which cleverly draws in an atypical audience, but gradually tells a story which is basically true. I confess fascination:-)

Other Comments by bitbutter

29. Comment #151647 by Thor'Ungal on March 29, 2008 at 6:08 am

I dunno about anyone else but I do get a warm fuzzy feeling everytime the machine hurls screaming some errant creationists. Yes I know it's wrong but still imagine Kent Hovind at the end of one of those claws. Wrong...but funny.

ooh: "We appreciate you concern, it is noted and stupid", classic

For some reason Dan Dennet suits that look.

Thor'Ungal

Other Comments by Thor'Ungal

30. Comment #151650 by Jimbesity on March 29, 2008 at 6:16 am

Dennett looks absolutely splendid! It reminds me somewhat -- if you'll forgive me -- of a picture I saw once of 'Pimp Gandalf'. Eugenie looks ridiculous as well, but it all adds to the laugh.

Other Comments by Jimbesity

31. Comment #151652 by sornord on March 29, 2008 at 6:18 am

The RD South Park episode wasn't that good but this one is hilarious. Wonder what the Sam, Eugenie and the others think...

Other Comments by sornord

32. Comment #151657 by peoplearewrong on March 29, 2008 at 6:28 am

Sorry to say it folks, but this does not seem to me as pro- our side of the debate.
Clever as anything I've seen in a long time and certainly well informed on the issues, but the way "we" are presented is as supremely arrogant know-it-alls. Any comments here wishing to draw the maker of this into our camp just for being clever and informed will be laughed off by said maker for sure...
Still not a bad piece of work.

Other Comments by peoplearewrong

33. Comment #151659 by LaTomate on March 29, 2008 at 6:29 am

Oh dear. I unfortunately found this funny. As for who's side it's on, well seems to go both ways. Maybe I'm not subtle enough to understand...

Other Comments by LaTomate

34. Comment #151661 by Frankus1122 on March 29, 2008 at 6:37 am

I think it's a good thing.

but the way "we" are presented is as supremely arrogant know-it-alls.

You should be able to laugh at yourself.

Other Comments by Frankus1122

35. Comment #151662 by skyhook on March 29, 2008 at 6:37 am

At first I thought it was insulting. But now I think it's a parody of the creationist view of science and scientists - some of the language used is that of a creationist, but they wouldn't express themselves in this way. Science is a "big scary machine" metaphorically to them, but here it's a Terry Gilliam type monstrosity.

Other Comments by skyhook

36. Comment #151668 by Bonzai on March 29, 2008 at 7:01 am

Who cares whether it is "pro science"? It is fun and ingenious.


P.S. But I don't think it is on "our side" though, seriously, I don't know how some of you could think it is.

Other Comments by Bonzai

37. Comment #151669 by Styrer- on March 29, 2008 at 7:07 am

4. Comment #151544 by Richard Dawkins on March 29, 2008 at 12:44 am

If anyone can understand a single word of this, don't bother to translate, just tell me whose side it's on. I get the feeling (same with South Park) that there are people out there who assume that something that is obviously MEANT to be funny therefore must BE funny, and they immediately shower it with accolades such as "Wow", "Hilarious", "Awesome" and, most side-splitting of all, "LOL".

Sorry, I seem to be showing my age. Enjoy yourselves LOLling away.

Richard

I think I can just about understand Richard's apparent irritation here, though must say that I find the execution of this piece, if not its irritatingly unclear 'message', immensely more amusing than any episode of South Park, whose alleged humour entirely escapes me.

Putting together something like this takes time and effort, no matter whose side the creator is finally on. If I were Richard or any of the others, I would take the whole thing not only in good spirit but as an enormous compliment.

Whichever side it's on, it shows that Richard is succeeding hugely in 'raising consciousness.'

Best,
Styrer

Other Comments by Styrer-

38. Comment #151671 by dhudson0001 on March 29, 2008 at 7:12 am

So well produced...yes, a parody-but somehow out there in the middle, insulting humanity as a whole, as if the whole idea of taking sides was unneccesary to begin with. The more I think on what Harris says about branding, the more I have to concede the logic. Astonishingly smart production...

Other Comments by dhudson0001

39. Comment #151680 by Dr Benway on March 29, 2008 at 7:36 am

...the way "we" are presented is as supremely arrogant know-it-alls.

In the rap genre, over-the top self-promotion is de rigueur. Part of the fun.

What's going on? How does an old white lady in the woods catch on to the slim shady thing ahead of the kids? It's so, like, 2000. Hardly cool anymore.

Other Comments by Dr Benway

40. Comment #151681 by Frankus1122 on March 29, 2008 at 7:39 am

Styrer

Whichever side it's on, it shows that Richard is succeeding hugely in 'raising consciousness.'

This is why I like this video.
This is why I like the controversy surrounding 'Expelled'.

Other Comments by Frankus1122

41. Comment #151683 by Cgarner on March 29, 2008 at 7:47 am

That was hilarious. But I doubt a Creationist came up with it...I honestly don't think they're smart enough. Man, I just played into the elitist atheist stereotype big time huh?

Other Comments by Cgarner

42. Comment #151685 by Richard Dawkins on March 29, 2008 at 7:50 am

Maybe it's postmodern. Would that account for the fact that even people who purport to like it don't know what it means?
Richard

Other Comments by Richard Dawkins

43. Comment #151687 by Bonzai on March 29, 2008 at 7:54 am

Richard Dawkins,

If anyone can understand a single word of this, don't bother to translate, just tell me whose side it's on. I get the feeling (same with South Park) that there are people out there who assume that something that is obviously MEANT to be funny therefore must BE funny, and they immediately shower it with accolades such as "Wow", "Hilarious", "Awesome" and, most side-splitting of all, "LOL".

Sorry to say this, Richard, stop being so puffed up and taking yourself so seriously. Having a little fun won't hurt. :)

Whichever side it is on, it is well made, clever and very funny.

Other Comments by Bonzai

44. Comment #151688 by Frankus1122 on March 29, 2008 at 7:56 am

Maybe it's postmodern. Would that account for the fact that even people who purport to like it don't know what it means?

I like what you said here. I don't understand it but it makes sense to me.

;)

Other Comments by Frankus1122

45. Comment #151690 by Frankus1122 on March 29, 2008 at 8:00 am

I don't understand it but it makes sense to me.

This reminds me of what one of my students said the other day (one of the ones I try to teach critical thinking to):

"I believe palmistry is 100% true but I don't believe it because my religion doesn't allow it."

What.....? But....?

Other Comments by Frankus1122

46. Comment #151693 by Mbee on March 29, 2008 at 8:01 am

I can't stand Rap but I did think this was funny and as others have said here, it really does show that Richard et al are having an impact.

I think it would be of concern if this type of 'take off' and parody was not happening. It would indicate that nobody in the public arena was listening to the science/religion debate.

It may soon make it into the mainstream of American TV!
Well we can hope...

Other Comments by Mbee

47. Comment #151695 by Dr Benway on March 29, 2008 at 8:10 am

Maybe it's postmodern. Would that account for the fact that even people who purport to like it don't know what it means?

It's technically well made. It has some funny moments. But it's an outsider's voice. Wigger rap. A little embarassing, like when your dad says, "word up" to your friends.

And I'd guess the line is "Dick to the Dawk to the P-H-D."

Edit: I'm likely wrong about "outsider's voice," now that I think about it. If you're too young to remember when wannabe gangsta took off (boys getting out of their mom's SUV wearing droopy pants, dreads, and a sullen expression), rap is old. All old things are equally old. Rap, punk, metal, reggae, alternative - all equally old.

Other Comments by Dr Benway

48. Comment #151696 by gyokusai on March 29, 2008 at 8:18 am

When you read the lyrics critically as if you were reviewing a scientific paper or a piece of literature, and especially take linguistic patterns into account (not counting the rap form), there is no way in heck this video could have been made by anyone from the ID crowd.

Secondly, to reverse-quote Ripley from Aliens: "Did IQs just rise sharply (in the ID camp) after Richard and PZ left the 'Expelled' presentation?"

I admit the message is not entirely clear and certainly pokes a lot of fun at "us" too---but most satirical messages are not "clear" in this sense, which is precisely what satire is most often about---but one of the things that convinced me was the "machine" which is, as others have already pointed out, nothing but the wonderful, incredible, ever-moving, and awe-inspiring Scientific Method.

Over at Pharyngula, some people have thankfully updated the lyrics, i.e., Brian, MC Escher, Chris, Viscount (who pointed out the "Dawk" bit), and others. So here's an update: Enjoy!

[EDIT: And, hey, does this line sound "creationist" to anyone:
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.
Not to me, it doesn't.]

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 schtick.

Coz 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: Coz if you don't know me ...

RD: YOU DON'T KNOW DICK!!

Chorus: Yeah he's the Dick to the Dawk to the PhD,
he's smarter than you he's got a science degree!
Yeah he's the 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 : Yeah he's the Dick to the Dawk to the PhD,
he's smarter than you he's got a science degree!
The 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: Yeah he's the Dick to the Dawk to the phd,
he's smarter than you he's got a science degree!
The 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,

Coz 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 sciences'll 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.

Hollah!

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

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

[repeat chorus]

^_^J.

Other Comments by gyokusai

49. Comment #151698 by Dr Benway on March 29, 2008 at 8:20 am

"I believe palmistry is 100% true but I don't believe it because my religion doesn't allow it."

There's more than one person living in that head. That's where some neuropsychology can help move the discussion forward.

Other Comments by Dr Benway

50. Comment #151699 by Mark Smith on March 29, 2008 at 8:20 am

Art (good or bad) doesn't have to have a clear message. Once the artist has put a song or poem out there, it is a thing in its own right which may or may not cause reactions the artist wished to evoke. I know this might sound a bit 'artsy', but I think it is the case. And therefore it can be a mistake to try and definitively claim it as having been intended either for or against your position. I suppose if we knew who the artist was we could ask them what they intended, but that might be different again from the reaction(s) it provokes.

Other Comments by Mark Smith