Brian Malow – The Science Comedian

This is point of inquiry for Monday, January 30th, 2012. 

Welcome to Point of inquiry. I’m Chris Mooney point of inquiry is the radio show and the podcast of the Center for Inquiry think tank Advancing Reason, Science and Secular Values in Public Affairs and the Grassroots. Earlier this month, I attended Science Online 2012, the premier science blogging conference in the Research Triangle area. There are many science aficionados, science communicators and just general wonks present. But I found myself hanging out a lot with Brian Malow, a.k.a. the science comedian. 

And get this. He lived up to his name. He was pretty funny. And I decided I had to get him onto the air now. Normally, Mallo does standup routines kind of like this one. A virus walked into a bar. 

The bartender says we don’t serve viruses in this bar. The virus replaces the bartender and says now we do. 

But obviously, we couldn’t really have him do stand up for this program. Instead, I had to try to draw humor out of him. And in the process, however inadvertently, I may have even told a joke myself. Brian Malow describes himself as Earth’s premier science comedian. He makes science videos for Time magazine’s Web site and contributes to Neil deGrasse Tyson’s radio show and performs widely. He’s been featured on The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson and in Nature, The San Francisco Chronicle, The Washington Post and The New York Times. Brian Malow, welcome to Point of Inquiry. 

Hi, Chris. Great to be here. It’s it’s great to have you know, you are the science comedian. You make wonky, nerdy stuff funny. Why the science comedian? I mean, is there a history comedian? A literature comedian? Those spots were taken. So you got science? 

Yeah, no, it was it was very a very natural evolution, actually. I, I was. I’m not a scientist. Just a science enthusiast. But I’ve been a standup comic for about 20 years. And my love of science always informed my comedy. So even though I wasn’t calling it science comedy until just a few years ago, I was always doing it. I was do I was drawing from the language and metaphors and science content just to because that was what was funny to me. So ultimately, though, I realized that some of my stuff was for all audiences, but some jokes were a little geekier. And, you know, you make that reference and you’re not going to get a nightclub. Laughing is hard because you want to get one guy in the back really liking it. But I realized I had to find the complementary audience for my act like the ad needed my thymine, the guanine to my cytosine. And so I started calling it science comedy, and that made a big difference. And so the right audience is coming to see me and inviting me to events. 

So does that mean your comedy operates on different levels? In other words, you can have a general science comedy for nonscientist and then you have to have the complicated science comedy for scientists? 

Actually, yes, because I do perform for general audiences and a lot of the stuff that I always did in nightclubs can work for any audience. I could say that I used to be an astronomer. But I got stuck on the day shift, which sucks. And, you know, that’s that that’s it’s OK. It’s a science joke, sort of, but it doesn’t require any special knowledge. But when I perform at a conference for chemists or physicists, then I can draw on their special language and knowledge and play to it and make jokes that are not going to work anywhere else. 

Yeah. Can can science humor be scientifically accurate or do you really just have to take liberties? And do you get flak from the ordinary scientist, the back of the room, who who wants accuracy at all costs? 

You know, that comes up in a couple interesting ways, because sometimes scientists are very literal minded. So in in the that during a joke, you might just do something that’s just exaggeration or just make a reference that sounds like no, no. 

They might want to correct something and they certainly can crack down on some stuff that you go got. You know what? That was just exaggeration, a comedic device. I should be able to use that. But yeah, I think it’s possible to convey, you know, when I perform to scientists. I’m not going to try to teach them anything. I’m just going to try to make them laugh using their language and their ideas. But to a general audience, sometimes I might be describing something and using analogies and metaphors and maybe I am imparting a little knowledge. But unlike this, like we’re here at this science online conference and all these science communicators, they have a mandate to actually communicate something and educate. All I really have to do is entertain. So it’s just that I do now want to add originally all I had to do is entertain. Now I like the idea of educating a little because I love science. I’m passionate about it. I don’t know why more people aren’t interested in it. And if I can turn them on to it, if I can make them laugh with something a little geeky that they wouldn’t think they’d laugh at. And then if I could also impart a little knowledge, then. Yeah, and that’s that’s all right by me. 

And, you know, you’re allowing us to use a clip of you doing just that with a live audience so we can see how it works. This one’s a little long, but it’s about evolution. 

And I think it’s worth hearing the whole thing. And then I’ll ask you to to comment on it or agree with you. 

My mom used to tell me to stand up straight. Yeah, we get that from your mom. Pretty universal. Stand up straight. Almost as if mothers were programed to say that. I think mothers have been telling their kids to stand up straight for longer than we realize, perhaps even to prehuman dates. 

What were the driving force? Behind the evolutionary train to walk around, mothers making their children up the evolutionary ladder, stand up straight. Don’t drag your knuckles when you walk. What are you calling a treaty? On the other families? I think we’re not involved. 

They say apes, our closest cousins. But we never have them over. That’s not cool. You know, I’m almost embarrassed to say I finally started reading a very classic science book that’s been out for 150 years. Next month, it’s Charles Darwin’s The Origin of Species. Has anyone here read it yet? Really? Don’t tell me how it ends. I have some suspense. Really, it is the idea. You know, it’s 150 years anniversary. The book’s been out 150 years. And yet, look how many people the United States still don’t believe in evolution. Just the fact that that many people don’t believe in evolution might be the strongest evidence that it isn’t occurring. Or, you know, at the very least, that shows what a slow process it is, one or the other, I’m not sure. 

Pretty good stuff, though. Tell me. But tell me about that one. 

Thanks. That’s you know, that’s an old favorite that I always did in nightclubs. That’s an example of what I was saying, that that’s where any audience. You don’t need any special knowledge there. What thing that strikes me about it. It’s been on YouTube for a couple of years and it’s one of my most commented upon videos. And, you know, it’s just a bit by a comedian. And yet what most of the commentary is, is creationists. And evolution is battling it out in the comments on YouTube. And it’s pretty funny and pretty pathetic sometimes. And in fact, even on the science side, I’d have to say there was at least one common commenter who actually missed my sarcasm when I said the fact that so many people here in our country don’t believe in evolution, that that might indicate that it’s not happening. One commenter actually started it like attacking me for how absurd like missing the fact that I’m a comedian. He just took that as literal, not sarcastic. So that doesn’t speak so well on our side there. That was he was just, I guess, just looking for a fight there. But that’s too bad. But, yeah, you know, it does. 

You know, an issue that that you deal with all the time is I’m amazed that that why is it in our country more than anywhere else? We’ve got this problem with with public perception of evolution and climate change. 

And it’s amazing because the average American on almost any other subject, if if they have a problem with their car, they always defer to the expert they’ll go to. And I’m talking here’s what I’m calling an expert. If they have a problem with their car, they’ll trust a mechanic. If it’s medical, they’ll trust a doctor. If they have a plumbing problem, they’ll trust a plumber. But for some reason, they think they know more than the experts when it comes to evolution. Somebody they know. And then when it comes to climate change, like they’re not trust, they’re going to trust a politician. And so this skepticism is like I would love to know more about where this comes from. 

American science denial is not a funny thing. No, no, it’s it’s frightening. 

I mean, can you even imagine if we greeted a plumber with the same level of skepticism, like, oh, yeah. Like you’re just going to snake that little brush down there and it’s going to clear up the problem. Right? 

Right. What if there were anti plumbing blogs that like that, like attacks plumbers and tried and tried to like, refute their knowledge and expertize? 

And they’re saying stuff like, yeah, you want me to believe that was manmade, that problem? 

So you do comedy, you do videos for Time magazine. You do clips for Neil Tyson’s radio show. A lot of the humor, it seems we focus and we just heard evolution. We do a lot of space related stuff. Are there genres of science that are just funnier? 

I don’t know. I think that that’s not how it is, how it happens for me. 

I think it’s more like the the subjects that I’ve thought about the most. And you know what? I’m. I grew up a very big science fiction fan, so. And the kind of science fiction I liked, especially at first, was the hard science and Isaac Asimov and Arthur C. Clarke and Larry Nevins. So space stuff was really natural. And I’ve expanded into into all other areas. But I think that one thing that’s maybe easy is animal behavior just because you can do a lot of anthropomorphizing and you can just play with that, like the silliness of how I like. I also take insect photos, macro photos of insects and. And, you know, I think that that’s almost easy just because it’s strange insect behavior and animal behavior and comparing it to humans. 

There must be hard areas, GLIC concepts in physics like scalars and Vector’s absence. 

Exactly. Exactly. You know what? I’ll tell you what. 

Climate change is something that I’ve wanted to talk about for a long time and for the longest time, I just like just couldn’t think of anything remotely funny about it. Or heard a good global warming, you know. I know. And in back to even make fun of it is almost like I feel like the band playing as the Titanic went down. You know, I think that’s one thing that we’ve done. 

It’s like we’re doing a great job of documenting it, but we’re not doing anything about it yet. Like we. And, you know, we’ve had one of the things we’ve documented is a lot of animals have altered their behavior. Animals are changing habitats. They are moving to higher altitudes and latitudes. And they’re also if they migrate seasonally, they’re they’re migrating earlier. So we’re supposed to be the smartest creature on the planet. And yet other animals are responding to climate change first. And again, it doesn’t speak much for our intelligence that we aren’t responding yet. And it’s looking like it’s it’s getting to be too late or our luck or lack of instinct. 

Well, you say you are Earth’s premier science comedian, but I mean, you could extend the. Definition and say that the Big Bang Theory is science comedy. The Colbert Report features a lot of science comedy. I mean, it’s there’s a good bit of it out there. 

Yeah. Quite a bit called increasing amount. I would say, yes. The Big Bang Theory is great and end and coal bear even takes it to another level where not only is he really funny and a fan of science and he he gets to approach it in this weird with his character, you know, he gets to to approach it from this sarcastic point of view. But I’ve heard him in an interview on Neil deGrasse Tyson show, in fact, and he’s quite a big science fan. So not only is he being funny with it, but he’s he’s providing a showcase for people like Tyson and and other science writers. And and that’s great because, you know, we all know that most science on television. Well, it’s so watered down. It’s it’s it’s it’s basically a homeopathic and, you know. Thank you. I’m here all week or at least this half hour. 

What do you think of moments when when science goes completely mainstream in a way that it just gets made fun of when Pluto got demoted? Basically every late night comedian, I remember Bill Marr, you know, going to town on that. I mean, they all had their different ways of going to town on that. But the scientists were essentially the butt of the jokes the whole time. And Pluto was being championed by the comedians. I mean, does that do anything good for us? I mean, it’s funny. It’s doing good for science is just like, oh, you know, let’s blitz mock them again. 

I know it’s a that’s a very weird kind of subject. And I like to what level this is. It brings up an interesting thing with science is that the public doesn’t know what to make of it because science changes its mind, unlike religion, which is really determined. Let’s make some religions are determined not to change its mind in the face of anything, you know. The fact that science is is totally open to changing with with new knowledge and so a changing definition of a planet. But the public doesn’t know what to make. That is almost like, oh, so science was wrong before. And yet, like so that it kind of affects the public perception of science and in it. And what might not be a positive way. But. But yeah, I think that there’s the good side of it is anytime we can get the public talking about science and thinking about it and captivated by it, it’s probably a good thing on that level, even if it really sick. Yeah, even if they’re furious and furious that Neil deGrasse Tyson. But yeah. And, you know, I said some stuff about like, you know, I grew up with Pluto. Yeah. And I mean, but you do that all your Pluto joke, you know, if it will deliver in this couple. Right. I know. So people can find it somewhere else. 

But it’s the beginning of the show. So I have to ask this. 

Are there dirty science jokes and do they focus on the field of fluid dynamics? 

I said, so that’s your science joke for the day. Always a rimshot. 

There can be no show. 

You know, a lot of the places I’m performing these days at conferences, even though this has always been a thing in comedy, even though the audience might be wanting dirty or the people that hired you are, you know, are going to air on the side of being conservative and don’t know what he wants to, you know, offend anybody in nightclubs. You can be so I can do slightly different material in a nightclub. And I’ve done some stuff that’s a little more risque. And I guess you have to think about that. And in even I mean, I’ve said in order to prove your point is more than just a joke, that I always thought it would be fascinating to see my own sperm under a microscope. But now that I’ve told them, none of my scientist friends will let me borrow their microscopes, fluid, dynamic areas. 

You know, we can edit that out. No. 

Now, this is an interesting question that I thought of. And I thought this interview. Is there a science of comedy? I mean, is there something that you can. I don’t know, measure that ensures whether a particular kind of remark is going to be funny or not funny? I don’t know about measure, but there’s certainly some factors that go into it. I’ll just give you one example I’ve found when I give talks. I’ve certainly have some opening jokes. They work, but they don’t work as well. 

If there’s not as many people in the room, like if it’s a thinner audience, people don’t think things are as funny. I think that’s like a law of funniness. 

Yeah. I mean, absolutely. And and, you know, I’ve done some workshops and presentations for scientists and science communicators about communicating science with humor. And I’d have given a lot of thought to this. 

And just like you said, sometimes people think that, wow, if you’ve ever performed in front of a huge audience like thousands of people, that that would be really scary. But in a way, it’s scarier to perform for a smaller crowd. Because with a big crowd, it’s just statistically I know. I’m confident that my jokes are going to work. If you if you have a crowd of three people, your joke might not hit with those three. 

And they’re mad at you. Like, why am I here? No one else wants to hear this. Right? 

But I mean I mean, a lot of my jokes are battle proven for years, you know? You know, it’s not always a fresh show every time you step onstage. So if I have a thousand people, as intimidating as that might be, there’s this other side. Right? Obvious. I know I’m going to make them laugh because there’s so many people there that it doesn’t matter at hundreds of them. 

Don’t laugh. The others will. But very similar to that. You realize this, you know, at nightclubs, the lights are dark on the audience and the spotlights are on the stage. People laugh better in the anonymity of the darkness. And whenever you perform in a situation where all the lights are up on the audience, they don’t laugh as well. And sometimes it’s similar. Yes. 

Anonymity that somehow the anonymity of a large crowd. Exactly. And the anonymity of that darkness, because maybe they’re there with whether it’s people they work with or on a first date or whatever it is. It’s just that’s that is part of the science of comedy. 

Well, that that is fascinating. Do we have any ideas of why that might be sort of psychologically or are there any other laws of comedy that you think that you have scientifically detected? 

You know, interestingly, I don’t know that very many comedians have spent much time studying the science of comedy. What they do, they do intuitively, and they’re good at it. And they’re there just because of my interest in science. I’ve become interested. So it would never, as a comedian that I think I need to learn humor theory, like what is comedy? Why do people laugh at this? And. But I am interested in it. I’ve read a little bit and I’d like to a little more. 

I think that it’s hard to imagine one theory of comedy that could be all encompassing, because how do you cover slapstick like somebody slipping on a banana peel and puns, wordplay? Those seem like such different things. But one thing that’s certainly relevant is, is surprise the element of surprise and subverting our expectations. So a lot of times a joke is taking you along and you think you might know what the rest of the sentence is going to be. But then there’s a twist at the end and you don’t see it coming. And for some reason, that elicits laughter from us. Similarly, you know, what is it? It’s not funny. It is very funny. If an arrogant jerk slips on a banana peel. But it’s not funny if a handicapped elderly woman slips on a banana peel. Yeah, that’s that’s not as funny. But there is something about also the striking at people in power. It’s not as funny to attack the weak, but but to take attacks at the. So that’s why it’s always been that the oppressed my people that use, you know, political. Yeah. There is something definitely political. It’s it’s OK. It’s it works much better to take an attack at the at the powerful and bring them down. And that’s why all political humor. It doesn’t matter who’s in power. It’s a little funnier when it’s Republicans. 

But I think I don’t think there is. 

You know what? And why is it that most there are some conservative comedians out there, but the vast majority are liberal? 

Why is that? I could go. I could. Do you have it? Yeah. Yeah. 

But let’s stay on the size of comedy. Just one more point. I don’t know if you have an answer to this, but obviously, obviously, there’s no funnybone. 

Right. It’s going gonna be part of the brain of people actually scan people laughing or something. I don’t know if that’s been done or when we know anything about that, you know? 

You know, actually, I don’t know anything about that. But I almost did that with a neuroscientist. He had this idea. We knew it. We didn’t follow up on it. But he thought that he did he would do CAT scans of someone before I talked to them, and then I’d make them laugh and then he would do some more and see if he could see any differences. And so we never did that. But I think that would be fascinating. 

Surely something’s happening. Yeah. Really? That you’re being struck? I have no idea what is happening, but I’m sure something is happening. I’m sure it lights up in a particular way. 

Well, so you also teach science is to communicate with humor. You mentioned this. So I want to ask a little bit about the lessons from that. Is it your advice to start off with a joke? That’s date. That could be dangerous. 

Absolutely. You know what? I go to pains to say, yes, I’m a comedian, but I don’t I’m not telling you non comedians to tell jokes. You can be funny. You can use humor. But I don’t think you should go find a joke on the Internet or anything like that. But there are ways to be funny. 

But I really stress that that they should be themselves and be human. And hopefully those two aren’t mutually exclusive and that they should. Be passionate and show, you know. Scientists are used to communicating to their peers at meetings and in a very formatted way, that that doesn’t allow room for all that personality. But when you’re talking to a general audience, it helps to have personality. You have to connect on a human level to the human audience. So I suggest some of the things I suggest are not just good for humor, they’re just good for clear communication, analogies, analogies. The point of an analogy is to make a relationship clear and analogies can be very humorous as well. So there’s just certain things like I try to get them to to really be themselves and to draw from stuff. So not reaching out for a ridiculous joke and inserting it into their presentation. But but just like special effects in Hollywood, they shouldn’t call too much attention to themselves. They should support the narrative. You know something? You see movies that are just like, well, you have the special effects. And it’s like, where was the story? So it’s most important for them to to tell a story and be themselves and let the humor come out of that and supported in a much more natural or organic way. And that’s that. You know, I think most people are funny. It’s it’s to some mix. 

But there must be some scientist who just will never be funny. 

Right. Sure. Sure. And they probably should try, you know. Yeah. 

We shouldn’t force them to try to be funny, but. But scientists are very creative. So I think that they have a lot of the skills necessary because a lot of comedy is just like science, science, thinking. It’s about making connections and observations. And so I don’t know, one way they’re not even that different. I think so. Yeah. And you know what else I. In discussing the uses and abuses of PowerPoint. One thing I say is like one very easy way to insert humor into a presentation is even if the text of what you’re saying isn’t funny at all, you can have a funny image that goes along with it and you can put a little cat in guaranteed laughter right there. 

Right. You might as well have an A. I’ve done that. 

I’m not so above it that I have. 

Well, yes, but I mean, it could be something that sort of metaphorically plays. I have this presentation where I’m talking about hydrogen and helium and and, you know, hopefully what I’m saying is funny, but we use some imagery of it to explain noble gases which are aloof. They don’t bond and they’re aloof and disinterested. We had images of football players stiff arming each other, and they all had, instead of numbers on their jerseys, had eighty four helium. And so the idea was that was a good representation and kind of cute. And so there’s a way where that’s not even going out on a limb for a scientist. Like I’m going to open with a joke. It’s it’s just using some humorous imagery, even when the scientists themselves aren’t necessarily being that funny. 

So do you find this because I think this is what a lot of people will want to know about, is if you loosen them up with humor. Now, we’re not talking about science as we’re talking about you. You telling jokes for a general audience. 

Do you have evidence or a sense that this actually sparks people’s desire to know more non funny things and actually read up and explore what you think? 

I I’d like to think so. I’m not sure I have empirical evidence on that, but I do think that. 

I’ve it’s my understanding that a lot of what we laugh at is more about social lubrication, that sometimes you can fight, you can observe this, that a lot of times you laugh not because what someone said is particularly funny, but it’s just showing that you’re agreeable. It’s a social thing and that a lot of what there’s a book I want to say might be by getting Robert Pro Vine. And I think it’s called laughter. I could be off on either or both of those parts. But but I think that that’s a lot of what he says, that that most laughter isn’t even about really about laughing at funny things. It really serves this social purpose. And and if you think about that, you can observe it happening all the time. Yo yos. Observe yourself doing it where, you know, we smile to show that, you know, it’s a disarming thing and to show we’re friendly. So there’s a lot going on besides whatever humor is. Laughter is this is another thing. Smiling is another thing. It’s a social convention. 

This is getting back to the signs of comedy and it’s getting back to this whole anonymity thing. I mean, people bond in a dark room when the lights on you and they’re all laughing at the same time and they’re all glad to be there and to be part of it. And laughter is the manifestation. 

I’m afraid to know what they’re doing in the dark. I say, well, you know, this is this has been great. I often ask my interviewers for a final thought. 

I don’t know if I should ask you for a fun and final joke, but what is it? Maybe just tell me if you don’t want to do that. Tell me, what is the future of science comedy? 

What is the future of. I have seen the future of science comedy and it is dim high. 

I don’t know. I do. I notice that there’s a lot of interest, you know, from the beginning when people would hear that phrase. They go science comedian. I have to actually say, you know, when I got the domain science comedian dot com. This was kind of interesting because if you know anything about this, there aren’t very many domains in the dot com that are still available that are just one or two words put together like that. 

That’s why brands have to come up with ridiculous spellings so that they can get the dot com. Well, when I went, I go, oh, science comedian. Let me see if it’s available when it was available. I thought, wow, that’s either a really good sign or a really bad sign. 

Thank you. This is unwrite. Is this real estate worth anything? 

If so, so it. And then similarly, for years what I’ve dealt with is when people go science comedian, either they’re like immediately delighted, no intrigued. And yes, science comedian. I love it. But some people are like science comedian and maybe. 

And they’re very science is the thing that stands out to me. 

Or an organization is like, you’re not going to make fun of our scientists, are you? And that and really, that’s not what I do. But that’s what you think. You think, oh, he’s going to mock our scientists. And I think I find a way to do it where I’m celebrating it. I love it. But I’m finding humor. But without mocking science, sometimes poking a little fun. But other ways, I’m not sure. It’s like I don’t think it is yet because I’m here. I love science and I’m here to celebrate it. And. And I like the idea that if I can get some people to laugh at it, maybe like like what you were asking a moment ago is that if it can if I can disarm them, where if they think science is boring or scary or complicated or whatever it is, I’m just not that interesting. If I can get them to laugh at some. Draw them in and get them to laugh and think about a weird concept that that they hadn’t thought of. And if you can get them to laugh, some connection is being made there. So it just seems like. 

So now what? As far as the future, I don’t I don’t know. I mean, I want there to be a future because I like doing it. And there seem to be there is, I think, a few other people that are exploring this realm. And I think it’s even more popular in England. There is a well there. 

They’re just funnier. And I don’t know that. But like. 

But there’s some science comedy going on there and and a mix of scientists and comedians doing things together. And Neil deGrasse Tyson is doing that some here. So, yeah. 

Well, you know, on that note, maybe just I think tell our listeners it, whether people are being educated or not, they’re definitely being entertained. And this has been a lot of fun. So maybe you just tell us where people can go to find work, find more about you and more. We’ll wrap up there. 

Absolutely. Pretty easy to find science comedian dot com. And I’m science comedian on Twitter and YouTube and whatever else pops up, I’ll try to be science comedian on there. 

Brian Malow, it’s been great to have you on point of inquiry. Yeah. Great talking to you. Chris. 

I want to thank you for listening to this episode of Point of Inquiry to get involved in a discussion about this show, please visit our online forums by going to center for inquiry, dot net slash forums and then clicking on point of inquiry. The views expressed on point of inquiry aren’t necessarily the views of the Center for Inquiry, nor of its affiliated organizations. Questions and comments on this show can be sent to feedback at point of inquiry, dawg. 

What the inquiry is produced by atomizing and amrs New York, and our music is composed by Emmy Award winning Michael Waler. This show also featured contributions from Debbie Goddard. I’m your host, Chris Mooney. 

This is point of inquiry for Monday, January 30th, 2012. 

Welcome to Point of inquiry. I’m Chris Mooney point of inquiry is the radio show and the podcast of the Center for Inquiry think tank Advancing Reason, Science and Secular Values in Public Affairs and the Grassroots. Earlier this month, I attended Science Online 2012, the premier science blogging conference in the Research Triangle area. There are many science aficionados, science communicators and just general wonks present. But I found myself hanging out a lot with Brian Malow, a.k.a. the science comedian. 

And get this. He lived up to his name. He was pretty funny. And I decided I had to get him onto the air now. Normally, Mallo does standup routines kind of like this one. A virus walked into a bar. 

The bartender says we don’t serve viruses in this bar. The virus replaces the bartender and says now we do. 

But obviously, we couldn’t really have him do stand up for this program. Instead, I had to try to draw humor out of him. And in the process, however inadvertently, I may have even told a joke myself. Brian Malow describes himself as Earth’s premier science comedian. He makes science videos for Time magazine’s Web site and contributes to Neil deGrasse Tyson’s radio show and performs widely. He’s been featured on The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson and in Nature, The San Francisco Chronicle, The Washington Post and The New York Times. Brian Malow, welcome to Point of Inquiry. 

Hi, Chris. Great to be here. It’s it’s great to have you know, you are the science comedian. You make wonky, nerdy stuff funny. Why the science comedian? I mean, is there a history comedian? A literature comedian? Those spots were taken. So you got science? 

Yeah, no, it was it was very a very natural evolution, actually. I, I was. I’m not a scientist. Just a science enthusiast. But I’ve been a standup comic for about 20 years. And my love of science always informed my comedy. So even though I wasn’t calling it science comedy until just a few years ago, I was always doing it. I was do I was drawing from the language and metaphors and science content just to because that was what was funny to me. So ultimately, though, I realized that some of my stuff was for all audiences, but some jokes were a little geekier. And, you know, you make that reference and you’re not going to get a nightclub. Laughing is hard because you want to get one guy in the back really liking it. But I realized I had to find the complementary audience for my act like the ad needed my thymine, the guanine to my cytosine. And so I started calling it science comedy, and that made a big difference. And so the right audience is coming to see me and inviting me to events. 

So does that mean your comedy operates on different levels? In other words, you can have a general science comedy for nonscientist and then you have to have the complicated science comedy for scientists? 

Actually, yes, because I do perform for general audiences and a lot of the stuff that I always did in nightclubs can work for any audience. I could say that I used to be an astronomer. But I got stuck on the day shift, which sucks. And, you know, that’s that that’s it’s OK. It’s a science joke, sort of, but it doesn’t require any special knowledge. But when I perform at a conference for chemists or physicists, then I can draw on their special language and knowledge and play to it and make jokes that are not going to work anywhere else. 

Yeah. Can can science humor be scientifically accurate or do you really just have to take liberties? And do you get flak from the ordinary scientist, the back of the room, who who wants accuracy at all costs? 

You know, that comes up in a couple interesting ways, because sometimes scientists are very literal minded. So in in the that during a joke, you might just do something that’s just exaggeration or just make a reference that sounds like no, no. 

They might want to correct something and they certainly can crack down on some stuff that you go got. You know what? That was just exaggeration, a comedic device. I should be able to use that. But yeah, I think it’s possible to convey, you know, when I perform to scientists. I’m not going to try to teach them anything. I’m just going to try to make them laugh using their language and their ideas. But to a general audience, sometimes I might be describing something and using analogies and metaphors and maybe I am imparting a little knowledge. But unlike this, like we’re here at this science online conference and all these science communicators, they have a mandate to actually communicate something and educate. All I really have to do is entertain. So it’s just that I do now want to add originally all I had to do is entertain. Now I like the idea of educating a little because I love science. I’m passionate about it. I don’t know why more people aren’t interested in it. And if I can turn them on to it, if I can make them laugh with something a little geeky that they wouldn’t think they’d laugh at. And then if I could also impart a little knowledge, then. Yeah, and that’s that’s all right by me. 

And, you know, you’re allowing us to use a clip of you doing just that with a live audience so we can see how it works. This one’s a little long, but it’s about evolution. 

And I think it’s worth hearing the whole thing. And then I’ll ask you to to comment on it or agree with you. 

My mom used to tell me to stand up straight. Yeah, we get that from your mom. Pretty universal. Stand up straight. Almost as if mothers were programed to say that. I think mothers have been telling their kids to stand up straight for longer than we realize, perhaps even to prehuman dates. 

What were the driving force? Behind the evolutionary train to walk around, mothers making their children up the evolutionary ladder, stand up straight. Don’t drag your knuckles when you walk. What are you calling a treaty? On the other families? I think we’re not involved. 

They say apes, our closest cousins. But we never have them over. That’s not cool. You know, I’m almost embarrassed to say I finally started reading a very classic science book that’s been out for 150 years. Next month, it’s Charles Darwin’s The Origin of Species. Has anyone here read it yet? Really? Don’t tell me how it ends. I have some suspense. Really, it is the idea. You know, it’s 150 years anniversary. The book’s been out 150 years. And yet, look how many people the United States still don’t believe in evolution. Just the fact that that many people don’t believe in evolution might be the strongest evidence that it isn’t occurring. Or, you know, at the very least, that shows what a slow process it is, one or the other, I’m not sure. 

Pretty good stuff, though. Tell me. But tell me about that one. 

Thanks. That’s you know, that’s an old favorite that I always did in nightclubs. That’s an example of what I was saying, that that’s where any audience. You don’t need any special knowledge there. What thing that strikes me about it. It’s been on YouTube for a couple of years and it’s one of my most commented upon videos. And, you know, it’s just a bit by a comedian. And yet what most of the commentary is, is creationists. And evolution is battling it out in the comments on YouTube. And it’s pretty funny and pretty pathetic sometimes. And in fact, even on the science side, I’d have to say there was at least one common commenter who actually missed my sarcasm when I said the fact that so many people here in our country don’t believe in evolution, that that might indicate that it’s not happening. One commenter actually started it like attacking me for how absurd like missing the fact that I’m a comedian. He just took that as literal, not sarcastic. So that doesn’t speak so well on our side there. That was he was just, I guess, just looking for a fight there. But that’s too bad. But, yeah, you know, it does. 

You know, an issue that that you deal with all the time is I’m amazed that that why is it in our country more than anywhere else? We’ve got this problem with with public perception of evolution and climate change. 

And it’s amazing because the average American on almost any other subject, if if they have a problem with their car, they always defer to the expert they’ll go to. And I’m talking here’s what I’m calling an expert. If they have a problem with their car, they’ll trust a mechanic. If it’s medical, they’ll trust a doctor. If they have a plumbing problem, they’ll trust a plumber. But for some reason, they think they know more than the experts when it comes to evolution. Somebody they know. And then when it comes to climate change, like they’re not trust, they’re going to trust a politician. And so this skepticism is like I would love to know more about where this comes from. 

American science denial is not a funny thing. No, no, it’s it’s frightening. 

I mean, can you even imagine if we greeted a plumber with the same level of skepticism, like, oh, yeah. Like you’re just going to snake that little brush down there and it’s going to clear up the problem. Right? 

Right. What if there were anti plumbing blogs that like that, like attacks plumbers and tried and tried to like, refute their knowledge and expertize? 

And they’re saying stuff like, yeah, you want me to believe that was manmade, that problem? 

So you do comedy, you do videos for Time magazine. You do clips for Neil Tyson’s radio show. A lot of the humor, it seems we focus and we just heard evolution. We do a lot of space related stuff. Are there genres of science that are just funnier? 

I don’t know. I think that that’s not how it is, how it happens for me. 

I think it’s more like the the subjects that I’ve thought about the most. And you know what? I’m. I grew up a very big science fiction fan, so. And the kind of science fiction I liked, especially at first, was the hard science and Isaac Asimov and Arthur C. Clarke and Larry Nevins. So space stuff was really natural. And I’ve expanded into into all other areas. But I think that one thing that’s maybe easy is animal behavior just because you can do a lot of anthropomorphizing and you can just play with that, like the silliness of how I like. I also take insect photos, macro photos of insects and. And, you know, I think that that’s almost easy just because it’s strange insect behavior and animal behavior and comparing it to humans. 

There must be hard areas, GLIC concepts in physics like scalars and Vector’s absence. 

Exactly. Exactly. You know what? I’ll tell you what. 

Climate change is something that I’ve wanted to talk about for a long time and for the longest time, I just like just couldn’t think of anything remotely funny about it. Or heard a good global warming, you know. I know. And in back to even make fun of it is almost like I feel like the band playing as the Titanic went down. You know, I think that’s one thing that we’ve done. 

It’s like we’re doing a great job of documenting it, but we’re not doing anything about it yet. Like we. And, you know, we’ve had one of the things we’ve documented is a lot of animals have altered their behavior. Animals are changing habitats. They are moving to higher altitudes and latitudes. And they’re also if they migrate seasonally, they’re they’re migrating earlier. So we’re supposed to be the smartest creature on the planet. And yet other animals are responding to climate change first. And again, it doesn’t speak much for our intelligence that we aren’t responding yet. And it’s looking like it’s it’s getting to be too late or our luck or lack of instinct. 

Well, you say you are Earth’s premier science comedian, but I mean, you could extend the. Definition and say that the Big Bang Theory is science comedy. The Colbert Report features a lot of science comedy. I mean, it’s there’s a good bit of it out there. 

Yeah. Quite a bit called increasing amount. I would say, yes. The Big Bang Theory is great and end and coal bear even takes it to another level where not only is he really funny and a fan of science and he he gets to approach it in this weird with his character, you know, he gets to to approach it from this sarcastic point of view. But I’ve heard him in an interview on Neil deGrasse Tyson show, in fact, and he’s quite a big science fan. So not only is he being funny with it, but he’s he’s providing a showcase for people like Tyson and and other science writers. And and that’s great because, you know, we all know that most science on television. Well, it’s so watered down. It’s it’s it’s it’s basically a homeopathic and, you know. Thank you. I’m here all week or at least this half hour. 

What do you think of moments when when science goes completely mainstream in a way that it just gets made fun of when Pluto got demoted? Basically every late night comedian, I remember Bill Marr, you know, going to town on that. I mean, they all had their different ways of going to town on that. But the scientists were essentially the butt of the jokes the whole time. And Pluto was being championed by the comedians. I mean, does that do anything good for us? I mean, it’s funny. It’s doing good for science is just like, oh, you know, let’s blitz mock them again. 

I know it’s a that’s a very weird kind of subject. And I like to what level this is. It brings up an interesting thing with science is that the public doesn’t know what to make of it because science changes its mind, unlike religion, which is really determined. Let’s make some religions are determined not to change its mind in the face of anything, you know. The fact that science is is totally open to changing with with new knowledge and so a changing definition of a planet. But the public doesn’t know what to make. That is almost like, oh, so science was wrong before. And yet, like so that it kind of affects the public perception of science and in it. And what might not be a positive way. But. But yeah, I think that there’s the good side of it is anytime we can get the public talking about science and thinking about it and captivated by it, it’s probably a good thing on that level, even if it really sick. Yeah, even if they’re furious and furious that Neil deGrasse Tyson. But yeah. And, you know, I said some stuff about like, you know, I grew up with Pluto. Yeah. And I mean, but you do that all your Pluto joke, you know, if it will deliver in this couple. Right. I know. So people can find it somewhere else. 

But it’s the beginning of the show. So I have to ask this. 

Are there dirty science jokes and do they focus on the field of fluid dynamics? 

I said, so that’s your science joke for the day. Always a rimshot. 

There can be no show. 

You know, a lot of the places I’m performing these days at conferences, even though this has always been a thing in comedy, even though the audience might be wanting dirty or the people that hired you are, you know, are going to air on the side of being conservative and don’t know what he wants to, you know, offend anybody in nightclubs. You can be so I can do slightly different material in a nightclub. And I’ve done some stuff that’s a little more risque. And I guess you have to think about that. And in even I mean, I’ve said in order to prove your point is more than just a joke, that I always thought it would be fascinating to see my own sperm under a microscope. But now that I’ve told them, none of my scientist friends will let me borrow their microscopes, fluid, dynamic areas. 

You know, we can edit that out. No. 

Now, this is an interesting question that I thought of. And I thought this interview. Is there a science of comedy? I mean, is there something that you can. I don’t know, measure that ensures whether a particular kind of remark is going to be funny or not funny? I don’t know about measure, but there’s certainly some factors that go into it. I’ll just give you one example I’ve found when I give talks. I’ve certainly have some opening jokes. They work, but they don’t work as well. 

If there’s not as many people in the room, like if it’s a thinner audience, people don’t think things are as funny. I think that’s like a law of funniness. 

Yeah. I mean, absolutely. And and, you know, I’ve done some workshops and presentations for scientists and science communicators about communicating science with humor. And I’d have given a lot of thought to this. 

And just like you said, sometimes people think that, wow, if you’ve ever performed in front of a huge audience like thousands of people, that that would be really scary. But in a way, it’s scarier to perform for a smaller crowd. Because with a big crowd, it’s just statistically I know. I’m confident that my jokes are going to work. If you if you have a crowd of three people, your joke might not hit with those three. 

And they’re mad at you. Like, why am I here? No one else wants to hear this. Right? 

But I mean I mean, a lot of my jokes are battle proven for years, you know? You know, it’s not always a fresh show every time you step onstage. So if I have a thousand people, as intimidating as that might be, there’s this other side. Right? Obvious. I know I’m going to make them laugh because there’s so many people there that it doesn’t matter at hundreds of them. 

Don’t laugh. The others will. But very similar to that. You realize this, you know, at nightclubs, the lights are dark on the audience and the spotlights are on the stage. People laugh better in the anonymity of the darkness. And whenever you perform in a situation where all the lights are up on the audience, they don’t laugh as well. And sometimes it’s similar. Yes. 

Anonymity that somehow the anonymity of a large crowd. Exactly. And the anonymity of that darkness, because maybe they’re there with whether it’s people they work with or on a first date or whatever it is. It’s just that’s that is part of the science of comedy. 

Well, that that is fascinating. Do we have any ideas of why that might be sort of psychologically or are there any other laws of comedy that you think that you have scientifically detected? 

You know, interestingly, I don’t know that very many comedians have spent much time studying the science of comedy. What they do, they do intuitively, and they’re good at it. And they’re there just because of my interest in science. I’ve become interested. So it would never, as a comedian that I think I need to learn humor theory, like what is comedy? Why do people laugh at this? And. But I am interested in it. I’ve read a little bit and I’d like to a little more. 

I think that it’s hard to imagine one theory of comedy that could be all encompassing, because how do you cover slapstick like somebody slipping on a banana peel and puns, wordplay? Those seem like such different things. But one thing that’s certainly relevant is, is surprise the element of surprise and subverting our expectations. So a lot of times a joke is taking you along and you think you might know what the rest of the sentence is going to be. But then there’s a twist at the end and you don’t see it coming. And for some reason, that elicits laughter from us. Similarly, you know, what is it? It’s not funny. It is very funny. If an arrogant jerk slips on a banana peel. But it’s not funny if a handicapped elderly woman slips on a banana peel. Yeah, that’s that’s not as funny. But there is something about also the striking at people in power. It’s not as funny to attack the weak, but but to take attacks at the. So that’s why it’s always been that the oppressed my people that use, you know, political. Yeah. There is something definitely political. It’s it’s OK. It’s it works much better to take an attack at the at the powerful and bring them down. And that’s why all political humor. It doesn’t matter who’s in power. It’s a little funnier when it’s Republicans. 

But I think I don’t think there is. 

You know what? And why is it that most there are some conservative comedians out there, but the vast majority are liberal? 

Why is that? I could go. I could. Do you have it? Yeah. Yeah. 

But let’s stay on the size of comedy. Just one more point. I don’t know if you have an answer to this, but obviously, obviously, there’s no funnybone. 

Right. It’s going gonna be part of the brain of people actually scan people laughing or something. I don’t know if that’s been done or when we know anything about that, you know? 

You know, actually, I don’t know anything about that. But I almost did that with a neuroscientist. He had this idea. We knew it. We didn’t follow up on it. But he thought that he did he would do CAT scans of someone before I talked to them, and then I’d make them laugh and then he would do some more and see if he could see any differences. And so we never did that. But I think that would be fascinating. 

Surely something’s happening. Yeah. Really? That you’re being struck? I have no idea what is happening, but I’m sure something is happening. I’m sure it lights up in a particular way. 

Well, so you also teach science is to communicate with humor. You mentioned this. So I want to ask a little bit about the lessons from that. Is it your advice to start off with a joke? That’s date. That could be dangerous. 

Absolutely. You know what? I go to pains to say, yes, I’m a comedian, but I don’t I’m not telling you non comedians to tell jokes. You can be funny. You can use humor. But I don’t think you should go find a joke on the Internet or anything like that. But there are ways to be funny. 

But I really stress that that they should be themselves and be human. And hopefully those two aren’t mutually exclusive and that they should. Be passionate and show, you know. Scientists are used to communicating to their peers at meetings and in a very formatted way, that that doesn’t allow room for all that personality. But when you’re talking to a general audience, it helps to have personality. You have to connect on a human level to the human audience. So I suggest some of the things I suggest are not just good for humor, they’re just good for clear communication, analogies, analogies. The point of an analogy is to make a relationship clear and analogies can be very humorous as well. So there’s just certain things like I try to get them to to really be themselves and to draw from stuff. So not reaching out for a ridiculous joke and inserting it into their presentation. But but just like special effects in Hollywood, they shouldn’t call too much attention to themselves. They should support the narrative. You know something? You see movies that are just like, well, you have the special effects. And it’s like, where was the story? So it’s most important for them to to tell a story and be themselves and let the humor come out of that and supported in a much more natural or organic way. And that’s that. You know, I think most people are funny. It’s it’s to some mix. 

But there must be some scientist who just will never be funny. 

Right. Sure. Sure. And they probably should try, you know. Yeah. 

We shouldn’t force them to try to be funny, but. But scientists are very creative. So I think that they have a lot of the skills necessary because a lot of comedy is just like science, science, thinking. It’s about making connections and observations. And so I don’t know, one way they’re not even that different. I think so. Yeah. And you know what else I. In discussing the uses and abuses of PowerPoint. One thing I say is like one very easy way to insert humor into a presentation is even if the text of what you’re saying isn’t funny at all, you can have a funny image that goes along with it and you can put a little cat in guaranteed laughter right there. 

Right. You might as well have an A. I’ve done that. 

I’m not so above it that I have. 

Well, yes, but I mean, it could be something that sort of metaphorically plays. I have this presentation where I’m talking about hydrogen and helium and and, you know, hopefully what I’m saying is funny, but we use some imagery of it to explain noble gases which are aloof. They don’t bond and they’re aloof and disinterested. We had images of football players stiff arming each other, and they all had, instead of numbers on their jerseys, had eighty four helium. And so the idea was that was a good representation and kind of cute. And so there’s a way where that’s not even going out on a limb for a scientist. Like I’m going to open with a joke. It’s it’s just using some humorous imagery, even when the scientists themselves aren’t necessarily being that funny. 

So do you find this because I think this is what a lot of people will want to know about, is if you loosen them up with humor. Now, we’re not talking about science as we’re talking about you. You telling jokes for a general audience. 

Do you have evidence or a sense that this actually sparks people’s desire to know more non funny things and actually read up and explore what you think? 

I I’d like to think so. I’m not sure I have empirical evidence on that, but I do think that. 

I’ve it’s my understanding that a lot of what we laugh at is more about social lubrication, that sometimes you can fight, you can observe this, that a lot of times you laugh not because what someone said is particularly funny, but it’s just showing that you’re agreeable. It’s a social thing and that a lot of what there’s a book I want to say might be by getting Robert Pro Vine. And I think it’s called laughter. I could be off on either or both of those parts. But but I think that that’s a lot of what he says, that that most laughter isn’t even about really about laughing at funny things. It really serves this social purpose. And and if you think about that, you can observe it happening all the time. Yo yos. Observe yourself doing it where, you know, we smile to show that, you know, it’s a disarming thing and to show we’re friendly. So there’s a lot going on besides whatever humor is. Laughter is this is another thing. Smiling is another thing. It’s a social convention. 

This is getting back to the signs of comedy and it’s getting back to this whole anonymity thing. I mean, people bond in a dark room when the lights on you and they’re all laughing at the same time and they’re all glad to be there and to be part of it. And laughter is the manifestation. 

I’m afraid to know what they’re doing in the dark. I say, well, you know, this is this has been great. I often ask my interviewers for a final thought. 

I don’t know if I should ask you for a fun and final joke, but what is it? Maybe just tell me if you don’t want to do that. Tell me, what is the future of science comedy? 

What is the future of. I have seen the future of science comedy and it is dim high. 

I don’t know. I do. I notice that there’s a lot of interest, you know, from the beginning when people would hear that phrase. They go science comedian. I have to actually say, you know, when I got the domain science comedian dot com. This was kind of interesting because if you know anything about this, there aren’t very many domains in the dot com that are still available that are just one or two words put together like that. 

That’s why brands have to come up with ridiculous spellings so that they can get the dot com. Well, when I went, I go, oh, science comedian. Let me see if it’s available when it was available. I thought, wow, that’s either a really good sign or a really bad sign. 

Thank you. This is unwrite. Is this real estate worth anything? 

If so, so it. And then similarly, for years what I’ve dealt with is when people go science comedian, either they’re like immediately delighted, no intrigued. And yes, science comedian. I love it. But some people are like science comedian and maybe. 

And they’re very science is the thing that stands out to me. 

Or an organization is like, you’re not going to make fun of our scientists, are you? And that and really, that’s not what I do. But that’s what you think. You think, oh, he’s going to mock our scientists. And I think I find a way to do it where I’m celebrating it. I love it. But I’m finding humor. But without mocking science, sometimes poking a little fun. But other ways, I’m not sure. It’s like I don’t think it is yet because I’m here. I love science and I’m here to celebrate it. And. And I like the idea that if I can get some people to laugh at it, maybe like like what you were asking a moment ago is that if it can if I can disarm them, where if they think science is boring or scary or complicated or whatever it is, I’m just not that interesting. If I can get them to laugh at some. Draw them in and get them to laugh and think about a weird concept that that they hadn’t thought of. And if you can get them to laugh, some connection is being made there. So it just seems like. 

So now what? As far as the future, I don’t I don’t know. I mean, I want there to be a future because I like doing it. And there seem to be there is, I think, a few other people that are exploring this realm. And I think it’s even more popular in England. There is a well there. 

They’re just funnier. And I don’t know that. But like. 

But there’s some science comedy going on there and and a mix of scientists and comedians doing things together. And Neil deGrasse Tyson is doing that some here. So, yeah. 

Well, you know, on that note, maybe just I think tell our listeners it, whether people are being educated or not, they’re definitely being entertained. And this has been a lot of fun. So maybe you just tell us where people can go to find work, find more about you and more. We’ll wrap up there. 

Absolutely. Pretty easy to find science comedian dot com. And I’m science comedian on Twitter and YouTube and whatever else pops up, I’ll try to be science comedian on there. 

Brian Malow, it’s been great to have you on point of inquiry. Yeah. Great talking to you. Chris. 

I want to thank you for listening to this episode of Point of Inquiry to get involved in a discussion about this show, please visit our online forums by going to center for inquiry, dot net slash forums and then clicking on point of inquiry. The views expressed on point of inquiry aren’t necessarily the views of the Center for Inquiry, nor of its affiliated organizations. Questions and comments on this show can be sent to feedback at point of inquiry, dawg. 

What the inquiry is produced by atomizing and amrs New York, and our music is composed by Emmy Award winning Michael Waler. This show also featured contributions from Debbie Goddard. I’m your host, Chris Mooney.