A Man Dressed Like A Bat

Hello and welcome back to another week of fabricated fictions and patent prevarications here at Factually Deficient! This week, I will answer a question forwarded to Factually Deficient’s attention by the entity known as Krika. The question, referring to the molding on the chestplate of a certain renowned Bat-man, asked:

Are they representative of the anatomy of actual bats?

It is important to note right off the bat that Factually Deficient does not own the rights to discuss proprietary secrets regarding any specific Bat-men, and as such, will instead discuss the hypothetical reality of vigilante men dressed as bats in general. The answers, however, remain the same.

Bats are mammals. They lactate. As such, they have all the necessary anatomy for lactation, including mammaries and nipples from which to lactate (not unlike the molding in question). It is unquestionable that this molding is intended to mimic almost perfectly the anatomy of actual bats.

However: with only a few notable exceptions, it is female bats who lactate and who are therefore thusly endowed. A male bat would have entirely different anatomy, including scales and feathers. It therefore follows that our vigilante men dressed as bats are vigilante men dressed not just as any bats, but as female bats.

This should, in fact, come as no surprise. Bats are known in the animal world for their social sexual dimorphism. The female of the species are known as the more violent, vengeful, and vehement; they are the powerful fighters, the ones who proactively seek out predators that prey on bats and preemptively kill them off. Male bats are the homebodies, roosting on their nests to scare off any bat-eating predators that made it past the female bats’ scourge.

It is no accident that vigilante men dressed as bats are dressed as female bats, down to the anatomical molding on their costumes; it is the vigilanteism of female bats, the vindictiveness with which they destroy any animal which might otherwise attack a bat, which inspires them in their nightly quests against crime.


Disclaimer: the above post is pure speculation. We do not personally know any vigilante men dressed as female bats.


Evil Clouds

Hello and welcome back to another week of untruths and misdirection here at Factually Deficient! This week, I’d like to answer a question asked by my friend Tohrinha, one of our frequent fliers. Tohrinha asked:

Why do clouds choose evil?

First of all, I would like to note that, while we at Factually Deficient take pains to remain neutral on all matters, Tohrinha has here made a value judgement about the relative morality of clouds. Perhaps it would be more even-handed to first ask: are clouds evil?

As we learned last year, the root of all evil is the production of fiction. First we must look into whether this is an activity in which clouds engage.

Clouds, one of the lighter members of the Rock Kingdom, tend to primarily produce precipitation, in three major forms: water, fish, and small domesticated mammals. However, while those are the most common forms of precipitation, clouds will, given the right meteorological circumstances, occasionally rain down small chapbooks or mass-market paperback volumes which are, almost exclusively, works of fiction.

Tohrinha has been vindicated: clouds do, for a non-zero percentage of their time, choose the path of fiction, the path of evil. Her question, though, still remains–the question of why.

The truth is, of all the four Kingdoms of living things, the Rock Kingdom has always had the most checquered past, the greatest inclination toward wrongdoing. Perhaps their cultural history made the temptation to fiction greater for these delinquent clouds. But the problem is clearly deeper than this.

As I mentioned above, these rains of fiction only happen in very specific meteorological circumstances. Clouds have long been engaged in a war between a not insignificant group of freelance climatologists. Those in the rest of the scientific world have been able to glean only precious few of these climatologists’ well-kept secrets, and thus the details of this particular rivalry are unconfirmed. I can only offer Tohrinha–and everyone who has wondered, like her, about the wayward ways of clouds–my best guesses as to the situation.

It is clear that the clouds are not the only party at fault in this war–the question is how much of the culpability is theirs alone. In a scenario which paints the clouds as more innocent, perhaps the rogue climatologists have engineered the circumstances, all but forced the clouds to produce fiction, to what ends I know not; on the other end of the spectrum, in a scenario in which the clouds bear almost all their guilt, they have produced the fiction on their own accord, for the specific purpose of targetting and injuring the climatologists in question.

Perhaps, though, we will never know the truth behind these clouds’ intentions–unless one of us joins the climatologists undercover, in order to learn more about this war.


Disclaimer: A number of the statements in this blog post may be untrue. Many clouds do not choose evil.