Tomtomkent
23rd April 2011, 02:57 AM
Just for giggles. Everybodies favourite fictional reptillian just posted this in the Skeptoid discussion of placebos, and frankly, I think it is worth a thread here for everybody to share their (worst) attempts at sceptical songs in X-Factor style.
So..er... to the tune of F**k You by Celo Green:
If you come around here spreading your views.
I'm like: hey you, wheres the proof?
And if you want to pretend somethings the truth;
I'm like hey you, where's your proof.
People have views that are political,
but sceptics only worry about evidence emperical.
No body cares what you think of psychology,
unless you have evidence against the methodology.
When you insuate bias,
you could be a liar,
so hey you! Wheres the proof?
Well-a-well-a-well-a we adopt a view that is impartial,
when we have a study to make.
We ask which path Ibn al-Haytham would take.
(oh yeah oh yeah)
Because it doesnt matter what we think is right or ethical,
only what we can prove with evidence emperical.
That people, have different views,
hardly counts as news.
That henkel was a member of the NSDP,
doesnt change the evidence we see.
We ask why his rockets might fly.
It doesn't change 'cos he was a nazi guy.
So if you come around here spreading your views.
I'm like hey you, where's the proof.
And if you want to pretend somethings the truth,
I say hey you! Where's the proof.
Psychologists peer review, in these here articles.
With the same standard as the physics of particles.
Subjective memories, and a hatred of books,
aren't statistically significant by the looks.
You need to cite reliable sources,
a few clicks on googles scholar resources.
(This is where the skeptoid post ran out of digits, but it continues)
So if you come around here spreading your views,
I'm like hey you! Where's the proof.
And if you want to pretend somethings the truth.
I'm like hey you, where't the proof?
Because if we judge by a moral view
what stops us judging god was true?
It doesn't matter if you have seen the light,
we put worldviews aside and narrow our sight.
Which ever philosophy you attract,
the science can only be about the facts.
So get off your soap box and look for a study,
as all your rants are unfounded and muddy.
Choir: So if you come around here spreading your views,
I'm like hey you! Where's the proof.
And if you want to pretend somethings the truth.
I'm like hey you, where't the proof?
I tried to take this to my dad,
he siad guessing ethics will drive us mad.
He said it was one for the hypothetico-Deductive model
So he told me told to read the data and ask Aristotle.
(Choir: oh yeah oh yeah oh yeah)
Whewell told me we cant rely on experience alone
Because we can misattribute results to our martyrs stone.
So if you come around here spreading your views,
I'm like hey you! Where's the proof.
And if you want to pretend somethings the truth.
I'm like hey you, where't the proof?
So..er... to the tune of F**k You by Celo Green:
If you come around here spreading your views.
I'm like: hey you, wheres the proof?
And if you want to pretend somethings the truth;
I'm like hey you, where's your proof.
People have views that are political,
but sceptics only worry about evidence emperical.
No body cares what you think of psychology,
unless you have evidence against the methodology.
When you insuate bias,
you could be a liar,
so hey you! Wheres the proof?
Well-a-well-a-well-a we adopt a view that is impartial,
when we have a study to make.
We ask which path Ibn al-Haytham would take.
(oh yeah oh yeah)
Because it doesnt matter what we think is right or ethical,
only what we can prove with evidence emperical.
That people, have different views,
hardly counts as news.
That henkel was a member of the NSDP,
doesnt change the evidence we see.
We ask why his rockets might fly.
It doesn't change 'cos he was a nazi guy.
So if you come around here spreading your views.
I'm like hey you, where's the proof.
And if you want to pretend somethings the truth,
I say hey you! Where's the proof.
Psychologists peer review, in these here articles.
With the same standard as the physics of particles.
Subjective memories, and a hatred of books,
aren't statistically significant by the looks.
You need to cite reliable sources,
a few clicks on googles scholar resources.
(This is where the skeptoid post ran out of digits, but it continues)
So if you come around here spreading your views,
I'm like hey you! Where's the proof.
And if you want to pretend somethings the truth.
I'm like hey you, where't the proof?
Because if we judge by a moral view
what stops us judging god was true?
It doesn't matter if you have seen the light,
we put worldviews aside and narrow our sight.
Which ever philosophy you attract,
the science can only be about the facts.
So get off your soap box and look for a study,
as all your rants are unfounded and muddy.
Choir: So if you come around here spreading your views,
I'm like hey you! Where's the proof.
And if you want to pretend somethings the truth.
I'm like hey you, where't the proof?
I tried to take this to my dad,
he siad guessing ethics will drive us mad.
He said it was one for the hypothetico-Deductive model
So he told me told to read the data and ask Aristotle.
(Choir: oh yeah oh yeah oh yeah)
Whewell told me we cant rely on experience alone
Because we can misattribute results to our martyrs stone.
So if you come around here spreading your views,
I'm like hey you! Where's the proof.
And if you want to pretend somethings the truth.
I'm like hey you, where't the proof?