𝐎𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐒𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡 ...

"Research studies have shown ...". How many times have we heard that phrase narrated like an imprimatur for whatever the F is being stated as verified fact.

There's research, then there's research. Be skeptical. Just because it's "research" don't mean it's true. But, what is true anyway? There's aren't words for that ... anyway.

One type of study is to find out what's what so that we can glean some understanding about how things work. Take atomic energy. [PLEASE!] A prime example of how knowing how things work can be used for good, or ill. These days the conversation is over whether nation states in order to not be fucked over —Muammar Gaddafi is spinning in his grave — need to have an atomic bomb, or two, in the cupboard. What could possibly go wrong? Especially since we're fortunate to not have a single soup-brained nincompoop at any level of governance on the geopolitical world scene. [As if.]

Then there's "pure" research. Just looking into stuff to see what we find; what's there. Open ended. I don't know the percentages between the number of "applied" versus "pure" research studies, but you can be sure there's a lot of latter in the works and looking for funding. 

Researchers, they want to research. Whether any one of them is wise enough to be self-aware enough to research into themselves why they are disposed to wanna look into things anyway ... well, who knows.

So what's with Hippo farts? And the carpenter level? The story goes that this is an offshoot of the classic "pure" research study to determine how many wrinkles in a Bull's ass. The lab joke goes, "Bend over, let me count". Don't laugh. Who knows. It just may be that the number and pattern of wrinkles in a Bull's ass may have significant implications, ramifications, and applications in who knows what and wherefore in so many areas of Human activity. That's "pure" research, you never know.

So what about the flaming Hippo. Well, the study is essentially about how the number and pattern of wrinkles is a large beast's tuchus has effects on the many various aspects of effluent "windage". Why anyone would want to delve into this stinky mess ... well, depends on researcher inclinations and preferences. "Anal retentive"? Who knows. A lot of history is no doubt a result of such conditioned determinants. 

Let's not over state the complications of conducting such a study. The Monkeys? Well, they're the least complicating factor in what would otherwise be the necessity to strap that dumb beast to a contraption which as we know from our understanding of scientific process would be a hugely complicating factor and color the research unduly owing to the layers of input due to the apparatus itself.

From there, the world is your Oyster. The many permutations of measurements: volume, intensity, direction, duration, olfaction, heat — Did you hear the one about the guy who farts in church ... he must sit in own pew. — flame color, environmental impact(s) ... to name just a few.

Then there's the other variables: Animal sex — among the beasts of the world, seems there are only two ... still — age, indigenous locale, diet, health ... and, of course, the number and patterns of those wrinkles. 

As you can see such a study, while seemingly besides any point any reasonable person would want to make, can keep a researcher in lunch money for quite some time. This is not to say that it's all about the money. Like they say at Chase Bank, "Hey, it's just money!". Maybe for some out there. But mostly about, as we've mentioned, just looking into things. 

Even if it's looking into things from the behint of a Hippopotamus.