Wow, i know what you are thinking. No true, but examine it closely, and you'll
see that girls are trees and trees are girls. They are one in the same. You
may think I'm odd, but listen. Here's my rational argument.
(1.) Trees are really pretty. If I were walking down the street, and there
were no trees, it would be a pretty boring street. I wouldn't enjoy it, and
probably wouldn't go there. If I were walking down a street with trees on it,
I'd enjoy the shadyprtection they offer, and the fact that they look really
nice. Same with girls...
(2.) If you throw knives at a tree, it will get cut open, and might die. Same
with girls...
(3.) Trees look nice with their hair down. Same with girls...
(4.) Trees don't need make-up to be pretty. Same with girls...
(5.) If a tree falls in a forest, and there's nobody to hear it, does it make
a sound?
If a girl falls in a forest, and there's nobody to see it, does she
still fiw her hair?
(6.) Every tree I've ever had feelings for has broken my heart. Same with
girls...
(7.) When I got raped in chickatawbut hill, the trees all stood around and
laughed at me. Same with girls...
(8.) I hate trees. I hate girls.
(9.) Fruit grows on trees. Some girls smell fruity.
(10.) Trees get cut, sent to amill, and turned into various products such as
paper, lumber, and pez
(11.) I've never had sex with a tree. Same with girls...

So you see, according to my own reckoning (with some help from mike mulvey)
I've come to the conclusion that trees are girls. They are the same thing. I
hope I've provoked some thought.
P.S. I have ignorance pouring out of my sweat glands...

Phranks Theory on the Rainforest

Rainforest?! When the hell did it become the rainforest? When I was a
little kid it was called the jungle, a place where it's dark and scary
and snakes are crawling everywhere and there's large spiders that bite
you and, if you don't find an antidote for its poison in five minutes,
your heart will explode. Now it's the rainforest, a happy place of
butterflies with smiling little elves running around.

And when did swamps become wetlands? They used to be damp, muddy
places you wanted to get rid of, and now they're beautiful habitats of
endangered wildlife. Hell, they'll probably invent a euphemism for
deserts soon, maybe the "dry land", and they'll halt industrial
encroachment to save some stupid desert snail or kangaroo rat. Like
deserts animals will ever do us any good; they're always out there in
desert for pete's sake!

First of all, I think we should nuke the stupid rainforest (that'll
dry it up) so all those enviro-mental-cases will stop their high
frequency whining about its gradual destruction. Second of all,
well... I don't have a second of all, other than maybe making some big
international summit on enviromentalism, maybe have France host it, so
all the enviromentalists will gather in one place so we take 'em out
with one nuke. See how many uses I can think of nuclear weapons, but
we haven't even used any yet.

Well back to the subject of "rainforests," what the hell do we need
them for anyways? Did you say because there might be some undiscovered
medical cures in its varied plant and animal life? Boy do I wish there
was a way I could program this message so a lightning bolt could shoot
out of the screen at you. If God decided to hide some cure to cancer
way out in the middle of the stink'n jungle, then you can tell He
doesn't like us very much so we don't stand much of a chance
regardless.

The other argument people seem to bring up before their idiocy thrusts
me into a violent rage is that rainforests are "the lungs of the
planet". Let me clue you in: we could agent orange all the
rainforests, and we here in America would never know. We already have
tons of trees and plants here to give us oxygen; hell, we got too many
trees. They're actually a hazard; if you ever accidentally run off a
road, you're likely to hit a tree.

So if one of those little South American countries ends up destroying
all their trees and then suffocating, well, screw them. We never
needed them anyways. Actually that might be good for the economy
because then we could sell them our excess oxygen. Think of the
slogans we could have: "Oxygen Co.: Buy or die." So I guess now my
nuking the rainforest idea not only will get the environmentalists to
shut up, but it also has economic potential.

They really should put me in charge of stuff like this. But wait, you
can just do harsh things like that, the Earth is fragile! Hey, did I
just hear a whine? The Earth is not fragile. Go outside, jump up and
down as hard as you can, and the Earth will not fracture in two. The
Earth is the complete opposite of fragile. It is a giant rock floating
in space. Comets can ram into it at thousands of miles per hour and it
will still survive. So burn down those forests, deep fry those
endangered species, find the most fuel inefficient car you can, and
let the nukes fall like rain drops, 'cause we know the earth will
still be here long after so that we can exploit it for our own
purposes; and, dammit, that's the American way.