My company served free tryptophan for lunch today.

Then, in an equally rare move, served free coffee in the afternoon. I'll give you two guesses why, and the first doesn't count.

The men's locker room at Gold's Gym has an ad poster with a picture of some bozo winking at the camera, holding hands with a bikini-clad woman, walking on a boat dock, where the caption says "She'll never know it's not your boat. *** Boat Rentals."

My wife told me her sister called to see if she was the woman in the dramatic news video of a nighttime flood rescue in Texas because the woman in the video had her hair in a familiar-looking pony-tail. Bless her heart. Tell ya what, Jill; if Jodi is ever rescued in a flood, and the video is making the rounds at all the national news outlets, we'll give you a call.

My church used an pre-recorded telemarketing phone system to call me and personally invite me to a Women's Christian Outreach event.

Assumptions are bad. Unfortunately, we as men are sometimes required to make them to fulfill our obligation as properly trained house pets. I'll explain.

First, let's interpret the following question:

"At what temperature can we turn the heat on?"

Now, in my estimation, there are two interpretations; the first being the obvious, and the second being quite a stretch.

1. I'd like the heat turned on tonight. At what temperature would you (or, more correctly, "we") like it set?
2. How cold does it have to get before we turn the heat on? (And, by the way, this doesn't mean I have a desire to turn on the heat tonight...necessarily. I'm just talking about our first winter together and wondering what it'll be like.)

A certain member of the household declared recently (read: an hour ago), that the quote above and the second interpretation carry the same meaning. I had incorrectly assumed that the original question carried a heavy assumption with it. That assumption being, of course, a deep desire to adjust the thermostat so as to generate heat in the very near future. I'll caution the reader that the original question had no context. It was as though the question had fallen from a tree. Oh look! A question! It must have fallen from a tree...poor thing. I should let it loose and see what happens.

This brings up another discrepancy in our dialogue. Apparently, I had accused the speaker of not having made an assumption, but rather of having made an implication. To which I reply, "what's the difference?" I think the answer to this is that an assumption is something I had made, and an implication is something the speaker had not made. Yet, the question I asked didn't make sense, since I had said the question "carried with it a heavy assumption." You see, my accusation was wrong to begin with. I should have accused the speaker of having made an implication, which would have been the right thing to accuse, but still incorrect.

Dizzy yet?

So, in my brilliance, I came up with the perfect argument. Take, for example, a situation in which there are many dishes in and around the sink. I ask, "so at what point will we do the dishes." To which one might think, "oh, he probably wants the dishes done soon, I'll say 'sometime tonight'." Now, take away the context and ask the same question. It doesn't make sense, does it? Why would I ask about dishes when there are none to be cleaned? Maybe I was asking about imaginary dishes.

Ok, so now the original question carries additional assumptions (or was that implications...or context...or uurgh). The temperature today barely broke 50°F. Inside, it's chilly. She must mean she wants the heat on, right? Nope.

So, then I'm reminded that whenever the speaker says "it's cold in here," my standard response is "can I get you a sweater?" To which I say, "but you didn't ask me a question." At which point I'm told, with all the sincerity you can imagine, "well, my observation implies that I want the heat turned on."

I'm not generally one for conspiracies, but it has crossed my mind that 9/11 could have been a huge conspiracy to jump-start the economy (which backfired) or be used as an excuse for war. Recently, I was introduced to a video that claims in regard to the crash at the Pentagon, "in reality, a Boeing 757 was never found." At a minimum, it's interesting viewing. However, in thinking about the attack on the Pentagon on 9/11, I do not recall seeing parts of any airplane. I realize most of a large aircraft would be destroyed if it struck a fortified structure at 500+ mph, but shouldn't we see some portion of the tail, or a wing, or something?

And why did Bin Laden pop up a mere four days before the US presidential election after having been in hiding for almost a year? Coincidence or conspiracy?

Anyway, check out the video and tell me what you think. If it's on the Internet, it must be true.