"I'm A Climate Scientist," The Raunchy Climate Change Video

Sick of hearing that climate change doesn't exist from people who haven't studied the matter, climate scientists get together to fix the problem the only way they know how: hip-hop.

climate change video

There is nothing more amusing than incongruous people rapping (Andy Samberg has built a career on this notion), and there is perhaps no more incongruous rappers than Australian academics. That's why this video of Australian climate scientists rapping about climate change has been such a hit.

But where does it come from? Why do these climate scientists feel such a strong need to assert their academic credentials? They're sick of politicians and news personalities prefacing their climate denying remarks with "I'm not a climate scientist." These people are climate scientists, and they're here to tell you that climate change is happening. But no one was asking them.

The video is the brainchild of Australian comedian Dan Ilic. "In the Australian media as well as the global media, the climate change debate is often dominated by people who may have significant authority on the subject yet do not directly work directly in the field," he says.

Jason Evans, one of the featured rhyming professors, concurs: "Most of the people talking about climate change in the media actually know little about it (often happily admitting they are not climate scientists). Yet their opinions are given at least as much, if not more, weight than that of actual climate scientists. I can't think of another branch of science where this is true." After one particularly atrocious radio debate show about climate change for which no climate scientists were present, Ilic decided the best solution was to introduce the real climate scientists and let them have their say. And then he asked them to rap.

"I felt like I need to make a point in the media discourse that would stand out, get noticed," Ilic says. "I believe advertising wankers call it “cut through” the track had to be loud and funny. Talking heads [as in a documentary, not the band] weren’t going to cut it." And that's how we get the epic wordplay of the Lonely Island-inspired work you see above, which aired on Australia's ABC1 show Hungry Beast. The original is quite raunchy (we've embedded the clean version).

Is a joke hip-hop song the best way to address this issue? Probably not, but if reason isn't working, the next step is rhyming. "The best way to confront the issue would be governments and businesses showing leadership making brave choices," says Ilic. "And without hip-hop they may not do that." Plus, says Evans: "I heard that 83% of the Wu Tang Clan supported the consensus on anthropogenic warming."

Follow Fast Company on Twitter. Morgan Clendaniel can be reached by email or on Twitter.

Add New Comment

4 Comments

  • Andrew Krause

    I have yet to see a viable "scientific" argument in favor of anthropogenic global warming. The scientitic "consensus" itself comes from a very unscientific paper that was predicated on the logical fallacy of "appeal to popularity" ("Beyond the Ivory Tower", Oreskes et al). The Climate-Gate emails of a few years ago demonstrated that the bulk of anthropogenic global warming theory is based on cherry-picked data and "tricked" calculations that utlimately only deliver the results needed to maintain their grant funding.

    And lets face it, most journalists are communications majors who flunked out of anything else that might have required them to take the requisite physics, stats, calculus and chemistry courses to have a clue on the subject. So I'm personally a little sick of hack writers telling everyone that anthropogenic climate change does exist, and anyone willing to argue the point is simply a denier who should be made to wear a scarlet E on their breast and suffer the indignity of being shunned.

  • randoman

    Aren't you sick of hearing about people who disagree with
    the climate change people as being people who haven't studied the matter?

     

    Hard for me to get past such a slanted and false opening
    line (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L....

     

    The only thing the climate change people have proven is
    that misinformation is an important part of their 'science'. 

     

    Ok, now start blathering the name calling.
     

  • Blain Rempel

    I'm not a Climate Scientist :-) but climate science is an nascent, complex and not well-understood area of study. The weather and climate is changing, but it is yet to be proven what is causing the changes; are natural cyclical climate patterns at play? solar flares? human caues? some combination of these and / or other factors?

    I've come to realize our science and scientists aren't as smart or definitive as we'd like them to be. Our understanding of things relatively less complex such as diet and nutrition have changed dramatically over the past couple decades (coffee causes cancer / coffee prevents prostate cancer; eggs are good for you / no they're bad for you / no they're good for you again), so I have little faith that much of what we think we "know" today regarding climate will be "true" 5, 10 or 20 years from now.

    As early as 30 - 40 years ago we were concerned about Global Cooling today it's Global Warming. As recently as a few hundred years ago Earth experienced the Little Ice Age. I'm quite convinced our weather and climate today are different than 20 years ago, but what is "normal" climate? Or is "normal" climate even stable?

    There isn't definitive science to answer these questions much less define if the climate is changing, and how dramatically, and by what causes, and what if anything can or should be done to alter the current change. But there is a lot of scaremongering about the need to act now, in dramatic fashion, before it's too late. Reality tells me we aren't smart enough to even know where to begin to start or that we've adequately considered unintentional consequences.

    Now that doesn't mean there aren't reasonable and realistic tings we should be doing to help protect our overall environment (like not dumping sewage / pollutants / chemicals into our water supply, or spewing chemicals into the atmosphere, our turning our limited food supplies into fuel), but certainly not under the guise of preventing Climate Change.

    At least that's my opinion. As "not a climate scientist".

  • WMD

    Man made Global Warming does't exist! This from someone who has study the "matter".  Now that I don't agree, is this where everyone starts the name calling (stupid, dump, head in the sand)?

    Government and businesses showing leadership making brave choices? Sounds like more socialism to me.