Simpsonized Skeptics August 23, 2009

Simpsonized Skeptics

By Guest Contributor
August 23, 2009

Crispian Jago has already made skeptically themed cards, but he has trumped himself this time around.

Now, he brings us Simpsonized Skeptics:

Card Neil deGrasse Tyson


Card Ariane Sherine

You now have a goal in life: To get drawn by Crispian.

Previous Post
Why Are There No Hurricanes in Florida? God, Says Governor
Next Post
A Grammatically Incorrect Response to the Iowa Atheist Bus Campaign
Browse Our Archives
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment

  • At time of reading, the images aren’t working.

  • Thanks, Matt. Fixed!

  • nonfictions

    Ariane Sherine’s special power of giving Dawkins a hard on is sexist, degrading and offensive. I know this is supposed to be witty, but sexism is sexism even if it’s wrapped in humor.

  • Gabe

    Oh you see, now I HAVE to become a famous novelist (who’s known to be an Atheist), even if just to be made into a card.

    I want my own god damn card, god dammit!

  • Geoff

    Come on nonfiction, I know you are being witty, but other people might not.
    Ariane Sherine would give any heterosexual man a stiffy. I’m almost as old as Dawkins and I can see that.
    If only I were famous enough to justify a cartoon!

  • Zach

    I’m going to agree with nonfictions. I somewhat doubt that a sexy, male atheist would ever be described as having the ability to make Julia Sweeney wet.

  • Zach, speak for yourself! LOL!

    Hey Hemant! Where’s your card?

  • I took a look at the rest of them and they’re all funny.

  • Shane

    I somewhat doubt that a sexy, male atheist would ever be described as having the ability to make Julia Sweeney wet.

    What? Isn’t that Hemant’s power?

  • Zach

    Perhaps you’re right; Hemant is a sexy male atheist, after all.

  • Aj

    nonfictions,

    Ariane Sherine’s special power of giving Dawkins a hard on is sexist, degrading and offensive. I know this is supposed to be witty, but sexism is sexism even if it’s wrapped in humor.

    It’s not necessarily sexist. It’s subjectively degrading depending on your values. In the words of Stephen Fry “Well it’s offensive. So fucking what?”.

    Zach,

    I somewhat doubt that a sexy, male atheist would ever be described as having the ability to make Julia Sweeney wet.

    An argument from personal incredulity.

  • ChameleonDave

    I’m going to agree with nonfictions. I somewhat doubt that a sexy, male atheist would ever be described as having the ability to make Julia Sweeney wet.

    Because it would be unchivalrous (it is much more offensive to say a woman is aroused than arousing), and — more importantly — it would just seem too improbable, because of reasons apparent to anyone who has observed male and female human beings.

  • Am I in there somewhere?

    I am a moderately well-known skeptic, and am imminently Simpsonizable (fat, bald, bearded, etc.)