Sunday, December 24, 2006

Even Chlorine Addicts Get Second Chances

Freedom of speech doesn't exist. It's true. I already wrote a blog about how unhappy I was to be writing a blog on Christmas Eve. Needless to say, I got caught up in the passion of the moment, and my parents censored me. None of you, except the President, will ever know the contents of the missing blog. It will haunt your dreams until it is released in the Bonus DVD, with the stupid games and the blooper reel. So for those of you who believe in second chances, here goes. I decided to write something hopelessly sappy, to make sure that I don't get censored this time. Wish me luck; this could get blasphemous.

I was looking out the window at the snow (ok, so there isn't snow, but there were paper snowflakes at the President's house), and I was amazed at the beauty of these falling ice crystals. And then I got bored. But it made me think (and those of you who know me know that this takes nothing short of a cattle prod, generally) about the uniqueness of the snowflakes. They (but I'm not sure who) say that no two snowflakes are alike. This statement can be applied to people as well. No two people are alike. Aww... how cute! This is definitely a good thing, because I would feel really bad for the poor soul who knew my evil twin. I mean, I feel sorry for the people who know the real me as it is!

So why is every person different? Well, I think that it's because there are no two people who experience the exact same things. Something is bound to be different, and this could result in differences like those between Lucky Charms vs. Marshmallow Maties. You could test this out. You could put two clones into white rooms (it's always white, any other color could have disasterous consequences like the destruction of a common stereotype) and give them the same food (cold pizza) and the same objects to play with (I just made all that up). They're not going to stay the same. They'll figure out different things to do with the objects, and they'll eat their foods in different ways (chopsticks vs. forks, or just eating vs. talking on the phone at the same time). These differences will accumulate to create totally different people. I mean, even at the cellular level (doesn't that just SOUND smart? Or at least nerdy?), they will be different. It is, well I'll come out and say it, stupid to suppose that every single one of the clones' (insert favorite big number here) cells is used the same way, and the same amount, and that the cells will even mutate the same. With that creepy and crappy (sorry Hannah) made up situation, one realizes just how correct I am. One realizes how well I've analyzed all possible outcomes, and synthesized the correct answer. Go ahead and say it, Sir Rich, "Full credit for the second try!"

9 comments:

  1. That was past cheesy I would say that it is more like velveeta (The American Version of Cheese.) I am not quite sure if saying a paper is like velveeta is good or bad it's all up to interpretation.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, even if I can't spell conducive, I do know how to use it in context; and I'm pretty sure using one of those "words Hannah doesn't like" isn't very conducive to receiving a nice comment on your blog. But I guess I'll give you a second chance, since that seems to be a trend today, and I'll forgive you. You did, after all, apologize for using the word on the spot. So thanks for the consideration! Seriously. (Such a good spin on a potentially mean comment. . . Aren't you pleased?)
    -Hannah

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am pleased! Way to be, Hannah! I'll admit it, I'm quite suprised. I mean, no I'm not. I naturally expect such nice things from you. Or... at least I did until about 3 weeks ago...

    ReplyDelete
  4. It is a sad day that I have been forced to stoop to the level of censorship. I apologize. However, I also believe that the power of the pen (or keyboard) should serve to build up humanity instead of tear it down. With that said, let's hear it for second chances and sentimental blog entries, even if Hannah must overlook a rough spot or two.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Of course I'll overlook the rough spots; I'm a believer in second chances anyway, believe it or not. And I know that my friends would only do the same for me -- thanks, guys! BTW Mark, what was in that original blog that had to be censored? Thank goodness you were blessed with the dad you have to watch out for your bucket of integrity when it comes to your blogs. You should thank him. :)
    -Hannah

    ReplyDelete
  6. You know, Hannah? YOU of all people would not want to see this blog. Let's just say that it was highly derogatory, and with just a small payment of $5, you could know what was in it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hannah, I have a copy and will sell it to you for only $4.50 plus tax and then shipping adding up to about $4.75 (lower then what Mark's copy cost)

    ReplyDelete
  8. Deal, President. Just drop it by my house sometime when you get a chance, and I'll pay you in full. Wow, do I know how to get a bargain! You shouldn't be so stingy Mark - honestly, $5?
    *Hannah

    ReplyDelete
  9. What is this, Pres? Who do you think you are? Just because you live next door to me and can get a boot leg copy of a blog that was never released doesn't mean you can just do that! Haven't you ever read the FBI warning at the beginning of movies? You will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law if Hannah ever gets a copy of that blog from someone who's name isn't Mark.

    ReplyDelete