Abstract: Prompted by the increasing use of comedy in science communication, this paper argues that joke-telling is not only a fundamental social process, but one intrinsically linked to ideas about and within science. Humour is often based upon a sense of what is natural or unnatural, true or false, and may be applied to display a sense of intellectual superiority. It can be used didactically, challenging its audience to take on the point of view of the joke teller. In more incongruous mode, humour subverts and plays with social norms, occasionally challenging authority; but it can also be deeply conservative, equally as likely to emphasise the status quo. Methodologically applying Michael Billig’s approach of the ‘humour-sceptic’, this paper warns against allowing either medicalised or revolutionary images of humour obfuscate the use of comedy as a way of stating opinions about science. With the “Horrible Science” books as case study, my focus is on the use of carnivalesque and scatological humour, including the consequences of this for cultural imagery of the
body.