Saturday, May 5, 2007

Harrieticus apologeticus: tips for identification, tagging, and subsequent re-release

Krysztofiak, M. "Harriet apologeticus demonstrates markedly inefficient survival mechanisms when transported to hostile environments possessing relatively more selection pressures than native habitat: Is this species-wide apoptosis? The Journal of Abnormal Psychology and Maladaptive Social-Group Matrices. 2007: No. 44, pp. 1431-1439.

Harrieticus apologeticus is an omnivorous, indigenous animal ubiquitous to the digital plains of the Internet. This fascinating animal has again been noticed by scientific circles, following an extended quiescent period, when several researchers discovered that this ordinarily quite docile and relatively unimportant little creature had, world-wide, begun to display signs of anxiety and tremulousness, without apparent identifiable stimuli. Observations from across the globe--concerning multiple individuals of the species--showed heightened agitation, bizarre reactions to apparently normal stimuli, and actions inconsistent with increased biological fitness in present environments (i.e., animals were shown to engage in actions with profoundly negative consequences to the preservation of their health, and the health of their kin-group relative animals).

Reproduction is accomplished via two methods: direct cerebral parasitism and asexual budding. Sporadic reports of sexual reproduction of H. apologeticus permeate the scientific literature, but remain unproven for lack of sufficient empiric testing. Specimens have been brought into controlled environments and provided with a wide selection of "clip art," which has been surmised to stimulate sexual excitement in members of the species. Despite repeated experiments, ample "clip art" message exchanges, and obvious individual H. apologeticus sexual arousal, all animals remained physically aloof in regards to copulation with another member of the same species.

All individuals brought for vivisection have revealed hermaphroditic genital structures, suggesting that individuals, should sexual reproduction be possible, most likely copulate with themselves as the third mode of gene transmission.

(continued)

5 comments:

Misfit said...

I appear to be blog challenged. How do I post a message instead of a comment?

moderator said...

You log it, then you are transferred to the 'dashboard' page. On the left in the upper section of the screen there's a "New Message" link. Click on it; that's it.

moderator said...

Moreover, when you're looking at the blog page, one of the links at the right top corner is "New Post". Same thing.

Anonymous said...

MK, that's a good thesis you're writing over there! Keep going! We'll give you the Doctor Honoris or whatever it's called for your scientific achievements. :-)

MK said...

Moderator,

Thank you--I hope that one or another here found some humor in it.

Not to sound overly misanthropic or anything, but the larger purpose of that pseudo-scientific piece of crap was to show my disdain for any form of the false, overly affectionate tripe we note in social circles. Anyone who has ever belonged in any choir, ever attended any Manhattan cocktail party, or been in the "inner circle" of any discussion board knows what I'm talking about.

Of course, genuine bonds of mutual admiration CAN form on the Internet, and I have been privy to several of these; however, far too often I observe the fawning "kiss, kiss, zinger, LOL" exchanges that personally make me throw up in my mouth a bit. My post was meant to parody these false bonds of affection noted in many discussion boards--but most especially those we note on the Amazon ones.

Enough of that rant--to summarize, observing that type of behavior just kind of forces me to feel a little bit superior. Great, now I've revealed myself to be a misanthropic megalomaniac! Sigh. As, ultimately, a realist, I understand that this sort of behavior is required for social parlance to continue uninterrupted--but, GAWD, sometimes, you know?

Anyway, could someone else pen the rest of that "journal article." I'm fresh out of inspiration, divine or otherwise--I also think I've perfectly illustrated my basic point that the worst of the discussion board idiots are essentially engaging in mutual masturbation with each other.

MK