Celebrities Die In Threes, And So Do Cats

We know that celebrities die in threes, even though some people don’t seem to think it’s that simple. But I have always found my reference burst theory to be very interesting. It’s based out of a very scientific idea that things seem to get referenced all of the sudden multiple times in a short period, from seemingly disconnected sources. It was made up by me so don’t steal it and take credit for it.

For instance, all of a sudden you’ll hear an obscure 20 year old song on the radio that you haven’t heard in a long time, and then you’ll be flipping through an old magazine the next day and come across the name of that artist. If it’s a true Reference Burst (notice how the term is now capitalized), you’ll then proceed to see an old sitcom on TV where one of the characters makes a reference to that very song, or something along those lines.

It happened to me with Mexican Radio by Wall of Voodoo a couple years ago when it was referenced on an episode of Seinfeld shortly after I had heard it on the radio and seen it in print (I can’t remember where). That’s just one example – it happens pretty often.

Could it have something to do with the butterfly effect? One event causes a chain reaction, so the first reference somehow prompts the other two, not by chance, but by some complex chain of cause and effect. Could it be that Reference Bursts™ exist everywhere all the time and we only notice them when our minds are open to them? Could it be that I am a telepathic robotic bionic mutant-ic machine? My name is Brian, which is close to Brain, so maybe.

What does this have to do with cats dying? I’ll tell you – you just have to come on a short journey with me first. I’ll have you back to your cubical in no time. Refill your coffee mug, you closet caffeine addict, and let’s go.

A Short Journey

Yesterday I witnessed video of a team of lion hunters flirting with death. About halfway through it contains 5 seconds of some of the most amazing and terrifying footage mine eyes have ever seen. The video is work appropriate, 2 minutes long, and, although not required, is best viewed with sound. I probably built it up way too much. Sorry, but here it is anyway.

I want to go off topic for a second and point something out. Despite what you may be thinking about how terrible it is that they’re hunting lions, that guy drinks Milwaukee’s Best for sure. He got right back up and shot that lion. I would be burrowing into the ground like a little Hobbit creature of some sort. And stop judging that guy too. Maybe that lion killed his African wife and their 17 mixed-children. Ok, back to the subject.

You’re thinking “Man, I’ve got a lot more blogs to read today at work instead of finishing my project that’s due on Friday, and I wish he’d get to the point so I can just move on to Perez-Hilton.” I’ve got the cure for what ales you, my friend. Here’s where it gets interesting. Friday, not two days prior to Sunday’s video-tastic-ness, I happened upon a nugget of YouTube video involving a tiger, a stick-wielding Indian man, and a mostly uninvolved elephant. This one has about 3 seconds of sheer heaven towards the end. It’s work appropriate and 35 seconds long (with no audio).

You’re thinking “If this honky ever wants me to visit his blog again, he better have one more video clip that’s even better than the first two and conclude his post with a profound summarizing statement.” Today’s your lucky day, chief. A few weeks ago I witnessed the most amazing video I have ever seen. I know it sounds fake, but the video is entitled the Battle at Kruger and it contains footage of an epic three-way fight over an innocent little calf between a pride of lions, a crocodile, and a herd of angry buffalo. It is 8:30 in length and is worth every second, so watch it when you actually have a solid 20 minutes of time (I gave you an extra 11 minutes to rewind and re-watch the best parts).

You’re thinking “He’s doing it! He’s actually doing it! I hope he doesn’t screw it up so close to the end.” Don’t worry fake condescending guy, I won’t. It all comes full-circle because today, would you believe it, I happened to come across this article about the popularity of the battle at kruger video. I wasn’t searching for it, and I wasn’t even thinking about the crazy cat videos I had recently seen. In fact, I found it in the related articles section of an article on Digg about the godfather of the Internet predicting the end of TV as we know it.


Is there truth to my © Reference Burst Theory™? Have you had any crazy coincidences recently that would fall into this category? If so, you owe me $12 for stealing my idea that has been © Copyrighted and Trademarked™ and now contains the word “theory” in the official term too, just FYI in case you missed that. I know you can do that, I’ve seen it done. No one just says Pythagorean, do they? Who would give you any credit if you said “I used Pythagorean to figure out the third side of that triangle”? People need to hear that “theory” in there.

Here, I’ll type it again just to clear it up, this is how you have to refer to it without having to owe me $15: © Reference Burst Theory ™ ®. Yes, it has to be underlined and bolded, and just one last thing, notice how it’s Registered® too. I’m just covering my own butt here, ok.

The Gimcracker

Hi, I'm a person who blogs on the Internet and does not have a Facebook or Twitter account. It's like I accepted all new technology up to and including blogging, but then I rejected anything that came along after that. I am Social Media Amish.