Posts Tagged ‘science’
Data collected from 100% of your significant other over a three-month span point to a number of levels on which your relationship and overall quality of life would be enhanced if you were to take the relatively simple step of tending toward less chastity, the report claims. If true, the report has the potential to enrich an ongoing romantic relationship.
The researcher who led the study hopes the findings will have an immediate positive impact, but that depends entirely, he said, on your taking the matter to heart and acting accordingly. “The research speaks for itself, obviously, and the world would be a better place if in general people used their heads a little more often than their hearts – in this case, not the heart specifically, but whichever set of glands are responsible for raising inhibitions,” he explained. “At this point I encourage whoever reads the report to take it seriously, because following its sober conclusions can really bring benefits.”
While the report indicates an increase in positivity to be experienced if you put out more, a relative paucity of data limits the granularity the report can offer. The study’s original goal also included establishing a direct mathematical correlation between specific levels or frequencies of putting out and corresponding increases in satisfaction, closeness, and general well-being. However, the researcher, lamented, there simply have not been enough data points to put together a coherent picture of that statistical relationship.
“Beyond the important benefits that the study cites, for everyone involved, more putting out would also prove helpful in strictly scientific terms,” said the researcher. “In the interest of furthering human knowledge, if for no other reason, I urge the subjects of this study to cooperate in the creation, tracking, and documentation – preferably by high-quality video – of further material for a follow-up to this important research.”
Bethesda, MD, January 5 – Scientists at the nation’s leading institute for chronological studies have concluded that as of today, there is no point in resolving to make a positive lifestyle or behavioral change to mark the new year.
Researchers at the University of Maryland analyzed data from each year over the last 50, and determined that the temporal deadline for making a New Year’s resolution never occurs later than the fourth of January. Any resolution voiced or otherwise accepted after that date sill simply not take force, and the would-be resolver will have no choice but to wait until the following January 1 to make a valid commitment.
The study carries important implications for commitment studies, especially as they affect diets and relationships, says researcher Indyan Giver. “For many people, the onset of January activates their resolutions, but that only works when a person has a resolution lined up that can kick in the moment midnight arrives to usher in the new year,” she said. “But the calendar has some flexibility, meaning that as many as three more days can pass before it’s simply too late to make a resolution, and that person will remain unable to make any lasting positive changes for nearly 365 more days.”
To some, notes Giver, missing that tiny window of opportunity is a blessing in disguise. “Our study also found that up to 75% of Americans are physiologically incapable of sustaining a resolution beyond the third week of January, and 95% beyond the first week of February,” explained. “So this study is good news for most people, who shouldn’t bother anyway.”
The consequences of missing the resolution deadline generally involve becoming stuck in a rut of weight gain, bad habits, dysfunctional relationships, and undesirable work situations, with no hope of personal, professional, or any other sort of positive transformation. Which is just a well, says Giver.
“Imagine the deteriorating self-esteem that would result from all these losers being forced to confront their own inability to stick to anything positive,” she said. “The realization can be crushing, and send a person into an even more acute downward spiral of binging, guilt, inadequacy, shame, and a bevy of other unpleasant emotions. This way, they’re better off, knowing that it makes no difference most of the time anyway.”
“The factors that determine whether a given individual will be attracted to men, women, or neither, is not in the Satanic domain,” he said in an address to reporters. “I do, however, take glee in observing the discomfort and discomfiture of right-wing windbags reacting to people’s gayness, and I do all I can to magnify that.”
The exact extent of the belief that homosexuality is either a “lifestyle choice” or the result of such demonic possession is unknown, but the view that it is genetically determined, while accepted in the scientific community, has yet to gain significant traction among demographics that put more stock in what their preachers say than what the left-leaning media say. The same demographic group, however, comprises a large number of people also wedded to belief in an active Satanic presence in the world, and his announcement will have an as-yet-unclear effect on those segments of the population.
“The Satan-belief folks are often the same ones who deny empirical evidence in favor of a stubbornly literal reading of Scripture,” says social scientist Rick Santorum. “There’s no telling whether the trend will continues with this bit of evidence – it could be that, much like the geological and paleontological evidence, they will dismiss it. Or they might take such a direct communication from Satan himself at face value. My money, however, is on a schism between both factions, which is, after all, the American political and religious way.”
Satan declined to elaborate on any actual subjects of demonic possession, preferring to leave that as a source of tension and confusion. But he did allow that certain populations were predisposed to such manipulation, especially those in pursuit of power.
Mahwah, New Jersey, March 27 – Researchers studying the population of one of the largest retail chains in the US were shocked today to discover the occurrence of a parent shopping there who was not interacting negatively with the children in tow.
Observing the customers at the Walmart here for a doctoral thesis, sociologists Mor Bidley-O’Beese and Trey Lertrache spotted a man in his thirties escorted by three children under the age of ten, each of whom seemed to be content. At first assuming that the lack of fighting, throwing, vandalism, running around/away, and whining was attributable to the children being medicated, the researchers soon realized, to their puzzlement, that in fact the group was inherently polite and well-behaved. Such a family grouping has not been previously documented at Walmart.
“The initial observation of the subject in question naturally led us to the conclusion that some pharmacological component was necessary to explain the behavior of the children,” said Lertrache. “We had no precedent for a non-dysfunctional dynamic in this environment.” It was only after they witnessed the non-ironic use of such terms as “please,” “may we?” and “here, you can use mine” that Lertrache and Bidley-O’Beese began to realize the anomaly they had encountered.
“We had been unaware that such a creature existed in this habitat,” said Bidley-O’beese. “No previous studies have found an intra-Walmart parent-child framework that was not riddled with passive or outright aggression; raised voices; snappy retorts; sarcastic remarks; verbal abuse; or borderline physical abuse.”
A further anomaly occurred when the family in question intentionally spent time in the dental and personal hygiene aisle. “In our experience, that’s generally a pass-through-it-to-get-to-the-snacks kind of aisle,” noted branch manager Iona Methlab. “It doesn’t get much in the way of people heading there to get an item on their shopping list.” She said others have stopped in that aisle before, especially seniors looking for denture cleaning materials, but certainly no families had headed there initially.
At press time, the family was waiting at the checkout line without berating the cashier and the people ahead of them not to take all day.
Cambridge, MA, March 14 – Neurologists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology say they have discovered a correlation between improper pronunciation of the word “often” and poor performance on cognitive tests.
According to the study, people who pronounce the silent t in “often” are more likely to show significant deficiencies in problem-solving, comprehension, and basic common sense. They are twice as likely never to have mastered such skills as touch-typing, tying one’s shoes, and harboring a distaste for hip-hop “music,” and three times as likely to put just plain wrong toppings on pizza, such as anchovies, pineapple, corn, and tuna – even simultaneously.
Pronunciation of the t, which is manifestly wrong, according to anyone who knows anything, follows the example of the word soften. “Do people use fabric sof-tener when they do laundry?” asked the study’s lead author, Dr. Yogi Berra of MIT. “Apparently, the unintelligent hear other unintelligent people mangling the word and it sounds higher-class, so they adopt it, as well. It’s basically a plague of stupidity.”
The study found a similar correlation among people whose locutions include “between you and I,” “at the and of the day,” “last but not least,” “blogosphere,” “Web 2.0,” “peace process,” and “in the future/in the past,” the last two of which Dr. Berra calls an indictment of English-speaking civilization as a whole.
Dr. Berra is developing diagnostic tools to predict, at an early age, which children are likely to develop into mentally deficient adults who pronounce the says of the week as if they are missing the penultimate letter.
Researchers examining manuscripts from ancient sources in the years Before Chat (BC) found multiple occurrences of the word without the terminal punctuation, indicating that it may have been pronounced with considerably less zeal than is standard today. Older dictionaries had always contained an entry without the exclamation mark, but sources with the term in actual use in its sparer form were not known. The discovery indicates that the pursuit of science! may have been a more sober undertaking in times of yore.
“We’re excited to be able to provide another piece of the linguistic puzzle, because science!” said lead researcher Brittany Hashtag. “It was mostly thanks to the hard work of those who compiled and collated the archival material with the help of technology. Science!” she added.
A similar study late last year revealed that originally, it was considered standard in online communication to end a sentence without appending “LOL” or an emoticon, a discovery that provoked a chorus of “OMG” from the academic community, which praised the researchers for its innovative use of science!
“Recent developments in linguists have me going, like, WTF?” says cultural anthropologist V@ne$$a $chultz. “The language and philology worlds are totes ROTFL over them. I’m glad these things are happening now, when I can observe them, because #YOLO, you know?”
At press time, researchers agreed the findings were amazeballs.