| September 19, 2009 Bigfoot Hypothesis Exposé |
For those of you who haven’t are unfamiliar with the Bigfoot Hypothesis, it’s a simple theorem that states that the issue of global warming will never be put to rest because you can never conclusively prove that it won’t happen.
Much in the same way that you can never conclusively prove that Bigfoot doesn’t exist. A multitude of video documented searches have taken place looking for this elusive creature, yet nobody has ever turned up any concrete evidence such as a carcass, a non-fuzzy-barely-intelligible video, a non-fuzzy-barely-intelligible photo, or even bones of the creature. Common sense should tell you that the substantial amount of searching coupled with the lack of results indicates that Bigfoot probably doesn’t exist, but that’s not enough for some people.
The problem is that no matter how many times you don’t find something, you can’t prove that it doesn’t exist. No matter how many times you don’t find Bigfoot, you can’t prove it isn’t real. Such is global warming. No matter how much science or evidence you find against the theories of global warming, you can’t prove that it isn’t going to happen. Global warming advocates can always claim that your science is wrong, or that it just hasn’t happened yet.
Thus and therefore liberals, hippies, and other people that are interested in the systematic dismantling of prosperous countries and prosperous industries have found an issue that can forever fuel their desires to crush whatever it is that rubs them the wrong way.
And so, here is an example of the Bigfoot Hypothesis being employed in real life. I read this article the other day. It is entitled Drop in world temperatures fuels global warming debate. It’s on a site called McClatchy. I’ve never heard of it, but Drudge linked to this article.
The basic premise of the article is that the Earth’s temperature peaked in 1998, and has since been cooling off. Here is an excerpt of the article below.
|
“Official government measurements show that the world's temperature has cooled a bit since reaching its most recent peak in 1998.
That's given global warming skeptics new ammunition to attack the prevailing theory of climate change. The skeptics argue that the current stretch of slightly cooler temperatures means that costly measures to limit carbon dioxide emissions are ill-founded and unnecessary.” |
Translation into Bigfoot:
“We have looked for Bigfoot for a while now, and we’re not seeing him. We’re starting to think that maybe there really isn’t a Bigfoot, maybe we should stop wasting our time, money, and energy looking for this fella.”
But you see, logic doesn’t dismay a true believer. Just as Bigfoot zealots maintain that he does exist, global warming zealots will never allow contradictory evidence to disprove global warming.
| “Many scientists agree, however, that hotter times are ahead. A decade of level or slightly lower temperatures is only a temporary dip to be expected as a result of natural, short-term variations in the enormously complex climate system, they say.” |
Translation into Bigfoot:
“Oh yon foolish disbeliever. You inability to find said creature is merely a measure of your own ineptitude. Just because you were unable to find it does not mean that it does not exist. Bigfoots are migrant creatures, after all.”
Another thing that rubs a hole in my britches is that scientist claim to be able to measure and predict current and future temperatures by fractions of degrees, yet they claim that the climate is “enormously complex” when they’re predictions aren’t coming true.
I’ve read that they expect global temperatures to rise about 2ºC (3.6ºF). As an engineer I can tell you now that most thermocouples aren’t anywhere near accurate to 3.6ºF. I highly doubt whatever their global averaging and predicting methods are, they are accurate to 3.6ºF. But nobody ever talks about the validity of the science. Guys with “Dr.” next to their name just spout generalizations using unnecessarily big words to make them sound smart.
| "The preponderance of evidence is that global warming will resume," Nicholas Bond, a meteorologist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in Seattle, said in an e-mail. |
Translation into Bigfoot:
"The preponderance of evidence is that Bigfoot does exist," Nicholas Bond, a meteorologist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in Seattle, said in an e-mail.
See, sometimes you can just insert Bigfoot directly without changing anything, and it still makes sense. The only confusing thing here is why would a meteorologist care about Bigfoot?
And so the article continues to talk about El Niño and a bunch of other esoteric topics trying to prove that not finding global warming doesn’t prove that global warming doesn’t exist.
And the depressing thing is they’re right, not finding Bigfoot doesn’t prove that Bigfoot doesn’t exist. He could always still be out there, waiting to melt the ice caps in the next 10 to 1000 years.
The real question I have, though, is what will global warming’s effect on Bigfoot be? Will Bigfoot flourish or suffer with the changes in climate? Only time will tell. Well, only if global warming ever does really get here.
But just between you and me, I’ve never heard PETA lobbying for laws to protect Bigfoot, so I have my doubts as to whether or not Bigfoot is real.
But what the hell do I know?