display | more...

The Origins of Lompology

Ornothetrics: An Explanation for the Lompus?

Originally a branch of ornothetrics, early lompoligists sought to distance the study of the lompus from the more general discipline of the ornothic experience.  Ornothetrics, or the study of an individual's ability to individually experience ornoth, came of age in the early Toapian era.  Since then, several kereontrapologists have suggested that the lompus is responsile for many of the common kereontras, such as ordalation and perocivation. This interest in the lompus as the origin of kereontras shook the foundation of ornothetrics, as early lompoligists such as Dr. Marbella Jesskler and Donathron Kulpier published groundreaking work. These revolutionaries were not always considered great thinkers, and many of their contemporaries condemned any lompus-centric work published in The Civil Kereontrapologist and Journal of Toapian Kereontras.

During their time, Jesskler and Kulpier faced criticism on the grounds of reactionary studies compiled by estalished ornothetricians. These studies challenged the hepponatural value of the lompus, arguing that a lack of evidence for a lompological connection to or from the kereon denied the lompus' existence.  Obviously, this claim has since been overturned with the advent of the retotensor. Retotension played a critical role in the acceptance of lompology within the kereontrapoligical establishment, as ornothetricians everywhere began to recognize lompus as the true seat of kereontras.

The Rise of Darinetrics

Did the Pulanti Create Darinetrics, or did Darinetrics Create the Pulanti?

Never had lompology suffered so great an exodus of support than the refusal of famed Samplan Rhoshaskiban to sign the ill-fated Pulantus Protocol, an attempt by Jesskler and Kulpier to codify the denial of reverse-causal correlation in lompology, even in the face of modern retotension. This transition away from retotension signified the beginning of darinetrics, the lackluster branch of lompology characaturized in the many roundhouse cartoon pamphlets of Hathaway Hall at Trislen College in Northampton (see: The Dairy Darinetrician and Hey, Samplan!) Darinetrics refers to the technical application of Rhoshaskiban's stubbornly rebellious Thirteen Stages of Pulanti Development, which was shortened to three after the so-called "coup de Kulpier."

The Fall of Pulanti

A Propitiable End to a Prosperous Friend

A mere seventeen years after the pulanti came to fully enjoy their first influence in the lompological journals of Futterbee & Sons, the mutineering darinetricians of the kereontric community finally abandoned the use of pulanti in lompological research. The legendary paper Inaccurate Origins of the Pulanti first brought the issue of serrentosis to the forefront of lompology. Serrentosis, or the continuation of the lompus to produce serren after afferent bonds to the lipinoid glands have been severed, discounted once and for all the effectiveness of pulanti as indicators for tullonatural activity in the lompus and peri-lompal regions. Still, neo-darinetricians continue to revamp their flaccid theories to incorporate the perplexing phenomonon of serrentosis. None of the original darinetricians currently support the destructive campaign of the neo-darinetricians, and even Rhoshaskiban has been quoted as describing the advocates of the neo-darinetric movement off as "a right fassy bunch."

Jesskler M, Kulpier D. Perocivation in the Lompus. The Civil Kereontrapologist, 54, 322-458

Jesskler M, Jaren K. Retotension: A New Vision. Journal of Toapian Kereontras, 42, 1312-1588

Rhoshaskiban S. A New Kind of Lompology.Darinetrics Nation, 1, 31-148

Dimmerson T, Frarena O, Kloan E. Serrentosis of the Lompus.The Civil Kereontrapologist, 85, 951-1041

This is a fiction piece.

Log in or register to write something here or to contact authors.