Okay, everybody’s here, good. Today we’re going to tackle a subject that’s important to everybody here, but especially important to our special guest, Simple Sam. We’ll see why in a moment.
“What is this meeting about?” asks Sam. “And who are all these, um…?”
…Bohemian looking types?
“One way of putting it.”
They’re artists, Sam. We called a special meeting to decide what you look like, thought you might be interested in sitting in.
“Me? You’re going to decide what I look like!”
Well, it’s sort of a quiet day. Thought we’d get around to…
“Don’t I have a say in my appearance? In fact, what gives anyone the right to…”
Nobody gets to decide what they look like, you know, Sam. And you have to admit that aside from your slippers, your attitude and your well-known crack-pot notions on climate change, you’re a pretty lightly sketched-in character. I mean, like, how old are you exactly?
Exactly. We decided to hold a conference to fill in some details. Today we’re deciding on your bald spot.
“I don’t have a bald spot.”
See there, Sam, that confirms it. The fact that you’re bald as a melon on top of your head and you insist that you still have a full head of hair is a perfect expression of your denier character. You do it with the evidence for climate change. You do it with your bald spot. A denier to the core! Thematically perfect.—See everybody agrees.
“I don’t agree.”
Are you saying you don’t like the idea of being bald?
But how can that be? I’ve been following your thinking carefully, Sam, and I was positive that you believed that thick hair? thin hair? no difference.
“How’d you figure that out?”
Just the other day using bread and butter and irrefutable logic I proved to you that it was the uninterrupted and continuing drop in Arctic sea ice volume that mattered in measuring the progress of climate change, not yearly measures of Arctic sea ice cover.
“Just a red herring,” says Sam.
But if ice volume doesn’t define how much ice you have, then hair volume doesn’t define how much hair you have. It’s only logical. That makes a comb-over the equivalent to a full head of hair…oh, my goodness, Sam. Inspiration!
“What compromise are you talking about?”
You don’t want a bald spot. Not a problem. We’ll solve it the climate denier way using climate denier logic. How much more reasonable can we be than that, Sam?
“As if,” he says.
And the reasonable and logical solution?—ta-dah!—we remove your bald spot with a comb-over.
It’s totally the same thing as not having a bald spot at all, you’ve got to admit, Sam. Ignore the volume issue as you deniers suggest, and go for coverage. The Arctic sea ice debate has taught us nothing if it hasn’t taught us that it’s not how much hair you have, it’s how much head you cover. Right? Right, Sam? –All agreed that Simple Sam should have comb-over, raise your hands. Good. All dissenting?
All right, unanimous except for one dissenting opinion. Good day’s work, everybody. To summarize, we’ve decided…
…we’ve decided that, for thematic consistency, Simple Sam should be depicted with a comb-over.
“I do not have a comb-over.”
Exactly. Denial. Isn’t it perfect, folks, how Sam never breaks character? Let’s have a hand for Simple Sam.
“I DO NOT HAVE A COMB-OVER.”
Of course not, Sam. *chuckle*