Running With Scissors

#PleaseDontBeLikePeter

In this age of social media and engagement politics, it is easy to forget the distinction between facts and opinions. As a PSA, we at "Running With Scissors" would like to offer you a crash course on how to differentiate the two so you can tell your uncle Mike that no, the government is not using chemtrails to control the outcome of the World Series. That would be silly. It's actually Reptilians.

But we are getting ahead of ourselves. We must first define both terms to better understand how to differentiate them.

A fact is a statement that refers to something real, verified by hard evidence, documentation, or objective observation, which is non-debatable, and that has universal acceptance. An opinion, on the other hand, is a judgment based on subjective observation, based on beliefs, and not backed by evidence, using assumptions instead.

If we said, for example, that the Sun is hot because of the constant nuclear fusion changing hydrogen to helium generating heat, that would be a fact. To say that the Sun is hot because it's God's Easy-Bake oven would be an opinion. A weird, disturbing opinion.

Of course, the distinction between the two is not always a clean cut, mainly because humans have a weird tendency to twist facts to suit their opinions. Let's take climate change for example.

The world is getting considerably more vulnerable to God's Easy-Bake oven, mostly because of our own emissions destroying the atmosphere. That is a fact. Some people have a different opinion, saying that climate change doesn't actually exist, since demonstrating it does would mean that humans are, generally speaking, disgusting water bags.

As a fun fact, "disgusting water bags" is actually the direct translation of the word Glorbians from the planet Andromeda Gamma use to describe humans. "Yg'rrrre't'oath," they say, with their three extra tongues.

Now, it would be easy to disprove said opinions, but those climate change deniers do go to great lengths to disguise their opinions as facts, doing stuff like commissioning biased studies, or having snowball fights in the middle of summer in a parliamentary setting. As such, they muddy the line between facts and opinions, making humans everywhere worse for it.

It would come to no surprise that there are some people who make a living from disguising one as the other, and vice-versa: Lobbyists, Easy-Bake Oven salesmen, and Lawyers.

One Peter Katz was particularly good at mixing both of them up for the benefit of their client, a fact that he proudly advertised in his business card that read: "Peter Katz, Esq: Will Generously Lie For You."

He once convinced a jury that a pharmaceutical company was dumping massive amounts of mercury in the river, not because they wanted to save money by illegally throwing it away, but as a form of population control for a supposedly predatory fish species he named "Caribbean Fukital."

When the District Attorney pointed out that there was no such thing as a "Caribbean Fukital," Peter threw a handful of confetti into the air and said "Not anymore. You're welcome!"

Please, don't be like Peter.

Thing is, when you're so used to mixing those two concepts, it becomes very hard to separate them when needed, a fact Peter was coming to terms with when, against his previous opinion that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police were a bunch of monkeys in nutcracker suits that wouldn't chase them over the border, the complete opposite was happening.

Again, please, don't be like Peter.

As Sarah drove the suicide bus at full speed south, at least ten Canadian Mounted Police vehicles—that's what they call their horses, we believe—were chasing them down with machineguns at the ready. Behind them, the less impressive and considerably less badass American Border Patrol were giving chase with their vehicles, which sadly, weren't horses.