I think we’ve all heard of Murphy’s Law, right? That’s the one that states that anything that can go wrong will go wrong (and at the worst possible time). (<That last part in parentheses was how I learned it from my High School science teacher, proving he had more experience with this law in action than even its discoverers.) But I think we’re all familiar with it, and that’s it’s pretty much true much of the time. But since it’s not always true all of the time, it proves that something went wrong for those trying to prove its existence, and so it proves it’s really true, but that you have to understand the context of what is supposed to be happening to or for whom before you can truly assess its accurate existence, and also that if you’re testing its veracity, it will most certainly prove to be false, proving that it is, in fact, true. Get it? So basically, the more you test for its existence, the more it will prove to be false, proving that it’s true, because everything went wrong in your attempt to prove it to be true. And conversely, if you try to prove it’s false, it will seem to be true, until you try to achieve again the same result, in which case you won’t be able to. I hope we’re all clear on this so far.
But this is a scientific law*, and them scientist types don’t just go calling things laws if they ain’t, so there’s that. After all, it’s not Murphy’s postulate, or Murphy’s theorem, is it? No, it’s Murphy’s law. Which means it’s the way things work in our universe, like the Law of Gravity. Now, I think I know what you’re thinking there: Murphy’s law and the Law of Gravity are completely different types of ideas altogether. Well, I thought so too, until I stepped on a skateboard for the first time. Then I understood very quickly that the Law of Gravity and Murphy’s law are absolutely related and very similar: kind of like the Law of the Jungle, if you combine the two, and combine that still with the Darwinian concept of the survival of the fittest: for this Darwinian concept combines all three laws: the law of the jungle, the Law of Gravity, and Murphy’s law. After all, how else can you explain stuff like Jackass? And then, how else can you explain how people doing these dangerous things on TV that hurt everyone else never seem to get hurt? It’s Murphy’s law again! They should get hurt to show people how stupid and dangerous everything they do is, but they never are hurt, so it encourages everyone else to try it, and then the imitators get hurt. Get it?
* (It’s not actually a scientific law, because it defies proof through testing, so it can never really be proven to be true, which proves right there that it is, indeed, true, due to what it’s concerning. Because even if you said you were trying to disprove it or prove it, no matter what happened, you could still say something went wrong somewhere, no matter the result, right? So while you can’t really test for it, it’s pretty much proven true in every test somehow. See? Maybe they could call this Murphy’s paradox. Actually, sorry: there’s already something else called that. Which proves Murphy’s law occurred in my argument, because I just looked up “Murphy’s paradox”, and it was already something, so my argument went wrong. Right?)
