What’s Wrong with the World

The men signed of the cross of Christ go gaily in the dark.


What’s Wrong with the World is dedicated to the defense of what remains of Christendom, the civilization made by the men of the Cross of Christ. Athwart two hostile Powers we stand: the Jihad and Liberalism...read more

Beware the Believers!

Dick the Dawk, a scientist, who's much, much smarter than you, doesn't know what to say about this little ditty:

Speaking as a great admirer of Richard Dawkins (I always included The Selfish Gene on the syllabus of my ethics courses) I must admit that I'm kind of disappointed that he can't seem to figure out why this piss-take is so incredibly funny.

Best line in the rap: "Hey, if I was dyslexic, I'd even hate dog, too" - despite the grammatical error.

P.S.: for those unfamiliar, the chorus of Dick the Dawk's supporters is led by P. Z. Myers and includes, from left to right, at 2:40, Sam Harris, Eugenie Scott, Daniel Dennett, and Christopher Hitchens (with the I heart booze headband).

Clever stuff.

Comments (9)

Glad I waited until the kids were in bed to watch that one. At least the bad words are censored. But it is funny. And it's funny in part because it has a point. "I think there's something else here..." "Uh, we have a situation..." and the Machine comes and grabs the dissenting scientist.

That is terrific!
Not that I'd like to be on the recieving end, but terrific visual and verbal punning. Mr Dawkins may be right, but he's wrong when he gets righteous.
Now THAT is a sin.;-)

Funny indeed.

A similar (and older) one on Mr. RD: http://www.alanrhoda.net/blog/2007/02/does-richard-dawkins-exist.html

I suppose the other side (which is, to add, not mine) also has produced some funny stuff; and if not, Monty Pythons have.

That is a brilliant parody, although the Eugenie Scott figure creeped me out a bit.

Okay, this is really funny: Go to Dawkins's site and read the comments. "I think this is on our side." "Richard, kids really admire you but they can't find any way to show it without seeming sycophantic, so this is their way of doing it in their own language." (That second one is a paraphrase, but there is a real comment that it is paraphrasing.) On and on like that. "Yeah, I think it's generally pro-science." "This couldn't have been written by a creationist. They're not smart enough."

It's pretty hilarious.

Yes, I noticed that, Lydia. The register of their live exegetical options is as open as that of some continental philosophers and art reviewers.

Siris, a great blog, has a nice post about the video:

Richard, kids really admire you but they can't find any way to show it without seeming sycophantic, so this is their way of doing it in their own language.

Lydia, I have to apologize. My trust in mankind was such that I believed that you were mistaken rather than believe that another person, even if they are on the "wrong" side of the argument, could write or believe such tripe.

I stand corrected.

This, combined with the post on the Latimer case, has dealt a crushing blow to the foundations of my altar to the "Common Man."

You went and found the comment, eh, Steve? :-) Yep, it's really there. I can get the exact wording if necessary.

whats next
and where as you know
i dont know anything

could be a +
fresh outside of the box

Post a comment

Bold Italic Underline Quote

Note: In order to limit duplicate comments, please submit a comment only once. A comment may take a few minutes to appear beneath the article.

Although this site does not actively hold comments for moderation, some comments are automatically held by the blog system. For best results, limit the number of links (including links in your signature line to your own website) to under 3 per comment as all comments with a large number of links will be automatically held. If your comment is held for any reason, please be patient and an author or administrator will approve it. Do not resubmit the same comment as subsequent submissions of the same comment will be held as well.