Trees or Robots?

Which Would You Choose?

TREES _ by Stephen M. Berger_

For years, I have been on a crusade to reveal the truth about trees and robots. Finally, I have my chance to show the world the merits of trees and the many faults of robots. A short comparison of the two will show that trees are by far the superior choice.

Monkeys live in trees, but no monkey has ever lived in a robot. For me this is enough to make a decision, but wait, there’s more. Robots are known to run amok and kill people. Trees can’t even run, but even if they could run, they wouldn’t go around swatting people with their branches and dropping pine cones on little kids. Trees don’t kill people, robots do! Trees produce oxygen which allows us to breathe. I like to breathe and I produce gas. Robots don’t produce any gas. I just can’t relate to that. To my knowledge, no tree has ever replaced a human because it would work more efficiently. Ask anyone in Flint, Michigan and they won’t say the same thing about a damn robot. Plus, trees never try to act smarter than you, but robots are always trying to impress people with their vast amounts of knowledge. Damn those know-it-all robots!

If these reasons aren’t enough for you, just look at what some of history’s greatest figures have to say on the debate. God spoke to Moses through a burning bush (Exodus 3). A bush is just a small tree. God never speaks through robots because he likes trees better. George Washington’s teeth were wooden. He never would have been able to eat if a tree hadn’t given up its life to become his teeth. No robot was willing to die for the father of our nation. If George were alive right now, he’d be writing this and I’d be bass fishing with Warwick Davis, of Willow fame. I think the noted Danish existentialist philosopher and all-around great guy Soren Kierkegaard said it best when he exclaimed, “Fuck Robots!”

ROBOTS by Miles Zajacziowski

My opponent has presented a puerile, self-serving, and thoroughly immaterial argument that trees should be chosen over robots. I intend to prove otherwise. Robots are far superior to trees in more ways than one. To understand why, I must lead you through the sordid history of the tree from the moment of its inception to its current attempts to overrun modern society.

The first tree, Bob, was born into this world on a crisp morning in the winter of 1949. America had trounced the Germans in WWII and Mertyl and Paul were feeling quite giddy (Paul having just returned from the Pacific arena). As time passed, Bob matured from a tiny seedling to a strapping young pine. Mertyl and Paul showered their little sapling with affection, but was that enough for Bob? NOOO!! Bob had bigger plans. He wanted to KILL OFF humanity and move trees from the bottom of the food chain STRAIGHT to the top. My opponent may call these claims lies (he is a spineless puppet funded by the tree empire), but I have PROOF!!!

Item No. 1: Michael Kennedy was killed BY A TREE while skiing. Taken alone this might be seen as a noble attempt by trees to kill off the worst elements in human society (pedophiles, murderers, etc.),


Item No. 2: The esteemed U.S. senator Sonny Bono was violently butchered BY A TREE while skiing. Coincidence? I think NOT. This was obviously a tree plot to gain hegemony during the inclusion stage of civilization development.

Item No. 3: A Berkeley resident was mashed to death when A TREE crashed on his car.

I shouldn’t need to say much more to convince you that trees are not only boring, but nefarious. They seek to destroy our way of life, overstay their welcome in our homes, have their way with our women-folk, and leave the seat up after using the toilet. THEY MUST BE STOPPED!! In conclusion, robots are really great. I like robots and so does Jesus (if you don’t believe me, flip to Galatians 2:13). Besides, could you ever choose trees knowing that a cocaine-using, 13-year-old-girl-boinking, no tooth-brushing, neighbor’s wife-coveting, dirty bastard like Stephen Berger supports them? I think not.