About the SA Blog Network

Finally! A Science-Themed Miley Cyrus Parody…

The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

Email   PrintPrint

Those of you familiar with my blog here at SciAm will know that I’m a little obsessed with science-themed music videos. When I saw the ‘Wrecking Ball’ masterpiece of Ms. Miley I simply couldn’t resist making one of my own. On a serious note, I’m hoping that this video will provide a light-hearted way for people to understand a little more about evolution. It’s a subject I’m passionate about, and something that should not be up for debate.

Thanks for watching!

Carin Bondar About the Author: Carin Bondar is a biologist, writer and film-maker with a PhD in population ecology from the University of British Columbia. Find Dr. Bondar online at, on twitter @drbondar or on her facebook page: Dr. Carin Bondar – Biologist With a Twist. Follow on Twitter @drbondar.

The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

Rights & Permissions

Comments 9 Comments

Add Comment
  1. 1. tuned 10:09 am 01/13/2014

    When they don’t really have more than an average voice and average cuteness, they go straight to “sex sells”.
    Nothing new, move along.

    Link to this
  2. 2. Theatremee 10:10 pm 01/13/2014

    So much fun :D

    Link to this
  3. 3. 12:10 am 01/14/2014

    ha! hilarious, Carin!

    Link to this
  4. 4. Steven Lang 2:38 am 01/14/2014

    Yep, this is my video of the week. Please post lyrics of your song.

    Link to this
  5. 5. christinaak 10:01 am 01/14/2014


    Link to this
  6. 6. Peter65 10:29 am 01/14/2014

    If you view on you tube the lyrics are posted in the description.

    Link to this
  7. 7. Steiner62 7:56 pm 01/15/2014

    Carin the World needs more hot (topic) Scientists just like you. Phew!

    Link to this
  8. 8. kiteman 6:44 pm 01/16/2014

    I’m sorry, but I was not able to make out the lyric of the song. At least she’s sexy scientist.
    She says that she is passionate about the subject of Evolution, but that it should not be up for debate. This does not sound very scientific to me. Let’s not forget that it is the Theory of Evolution. It is an idea which may or may not be true. Personally I don’t believe in it, that is my opinion. I am not convinced by the explanations. For example, how could a flower decide that it needed to offer nectar to pollinating insects? The plant would die out before it could “evolve” the ability to produce the necessary substance.

    Link to this
  9. 9. kebil 7:15 pm 01/17/2014

    kiteman, you seem to have a deep misunderstanding of how evolution progresses. Nothing decides to evolve, there are no plans, nothing is evolving in anticipation of taking advantage of something to happen later.

    When scientists talk about a “theory”, they are talking about something that has a lot of evidence to back it up, something that has been tested and has passed all tests put to it. It is not the same as the common usage where “theory” just means an idea somebody has come up with. In science, we call those sorts of untested assertions hypothesis.

    If it was called they “evolutionary hypothesis”, your characterization would be spot on.

    Gravity is a theory. It has been extensively shown to be a real thing. Nobody (well, nobody that has bothered to look at the facts) writes that gravity is just some idea, it is probably not true, and the reason we don’t fly off the face of the earth is just because we have sticky feet.

    GPS devices make use of the “Theory of Relativity”, if they did not, they would regularly be off target by over several kilometers. While it may be hard to understand, all tests that we have been able to do regarding the predictions of relativity have been spot on.

    This does not mean that there will not be refinements, improvements, even a much deeper understanding that eventually shows that the predictions of a theory are not entirely applicable in every setting. Newton’s theory of gravity is now known to be not entirely accurate, but you need incredibly sensitive tests to see this. We can easily put a man on the moon using only Newton’s equations and there is not a requirement that we carry out a full relativistic calculation.

    Evolution has been shown to happen again and again and again in countless populations of organisms that reproduce over short time scales. In these cases, we can actually witness organisms change, produce a variety of forms, some of which have advantages that allow them to out-reproduce other variations, this is exactly how evolution is theorized to work. We have even elucidated the precise biochemical mechanisms by which reproduction with variation occurs, it is not some mystical transformation about which we have no knowledge.

    Of course we cannot predict it, because it is a random phenomena, just like the belief systems of man which mutates from generation to generation via not totally accurate transmission of information and the constantly changing interpretations of what came before. Religion has a long history of evolving, and nobody who has studied the history of religion believes that it has remained static since the “truth” was “given” to man.

    Link to this

Add a Comment
You must sign in or register as a member to submit a comment.

More from Scientific American

Email this Article