Men, we must all admit, are the better sex. It something needs killing, you call a man. We’re taller and our looks improve whilst sporting a moustache. And talk about the ability to reach things on a high shelf? Boy.
These being incontrovertible truths, the world would be a happier place if there were a whole lot more men. And, thanks to global warming—which is going to strike any day now: soon, soon—there will be lots more men!
They may have wee p-values, though. No, wait. Rather, it is thanks to wee p-values we know men will shoulder the fairer sex into scarcity, they presumably not being able to take the heat.
This is the judgment of science; therefore, it is true. Just ask Misao Fukuda—whose last name is a slur in Russian, da?—and a slew of others who wrote “Climate change is associated with male:female ratios of fetal deaths and newborn infants in Japan” in the journal Environment and Epidemiology.
We imagine Fukuda said to him- or herself something like this: “Say. Global warming’s going to mosey along some day, and it would look bad if I didn’t have a research paper on the subject. I’m going to get in on it. What question can I ask? How about is global warming ‘having any impact on the sex ratio of newborn infants’?”
Because, the good Lord knows, global warming can only do bad things, and messing with the sex ratio is a bad thing.
To prove the connection, Fukuda popped a diskette into his floppy drive, or something similar, and used “Microsoft Excel Statistics 2012 for Windows” to analyze some hardcore data.
“What statistical methods did they employ, Briggs?”
Glad you asked, friend. Let me quote them: “Pearson correlation coefficients (r) were used to evaluate whether yearly mean temperature differences were associated with either male:female ratios of spontaneous fetal deaths or male:female ratios of births.”
Now if that isn’t science, I don’t know what is.
“You’re the expert. But tell me, how do changes in yearly mean temperatures meddle with the sex ratios averaged over all Japan?
Nobody knows. My guess is that yearly global warming particles, which are everywhere during years, seep into lady parts at—ahem—just the right moment. They get in there and whisper to the X sperm, “Psst. Are you as hot as me?” I mean metaphorical whispering, of course: this is science. The Xs distracted, the Ys are free to swim upstream and do their manly duty.
“So if my wife and I want a daughter, we should wait to try during winter?”
You’d think so, but no. Everybody knows abnormally cold temperatures are especial proof the world is warming. It’s complicated, but it has to do with polar vortexes.
“But aren’t polar vortexes part of the climate? And therefore if they’re making extra cold weather, shouldn’t we doubt global warming theory?”
I’ll take your question to mean you want to know about the wee p-values Fukuda found. Here’s the money quote: “a statistically significant negative association was found between temperature differences (the exposure of interest) and sex ratios of births (the outcome of interest) from 1968 to 2012 (r = -0.518, P = .0002).”
“That is a wee P.”
Yes, sir, it is. About as wee as they come. Therefore, since p-values have nothing whatever to say about any hypotheses whatsoever of interest, as I have proved—not just argued, proved—it must necessarily be the case this wee P has nothing to say about confirming a temperature-sex-ratio connection; therefore, the connection between temperature and sex-ratios, which can only be a causal connection, has been proved.
“Hold up. You just said p-values can’t be used for that purpose. Yet you went ahead and used them for that purpose anyway!”
It’s science, son. It’s complicated. If it were easy, anybody could do it.
And did I mention CNN picked up on the story? They figure “conceptions of boys especially vulnerable to external stress factors,” yet, echoing Fukuda, they say higher temperatures will give us more boys.
“So it must follow that higher temperatures give rise to less stress?”
You got it. Yet another reason to welcome global warming. Just don’t sit up waiting for it.
¡Science! has spoken. So let it be written. So let it be done.
“global warming particles”
Hmm. I wonder, do these GWPs have quantum properties?
“It something needs killing, you call a man. We’re taller…… And talk about the ability to reach things on a high shelf?”
If something needs killing, I kill it. I am nearly the height of the average US male, so I can reach most things the average male can.
That being said, I’m all for more males. Bring on the global warming!!
You can get wee p-values by asking a lot of questions. In this case, ask ~5000 questions. That may sound like a lot, but it is not. I’ve carefully counted out ~50 or so papers. The median number of question is ~10,000.
Some of you are taller.
Some of us are smaller and cause vastly less “global warming” as we take up less space, radiate less body heat, eat less, use less energy to be accelerated and lifted in aeroplanes, lifts, escalators, motor cars, etc. etc. etc.
The whole Earth would have become a blob of molten rock long ago if approximately half of us weren’t less than average size.
Addendum:
Now you big guys owe us little guys big time because if we little guys weren’t approximately half the population of men “global warming” would have had you all without mothers, sisters, wives and daughters… according to the scientismic and statismic elite that we all know are the repository of all truth.