Hmmm. Erin has written to assure me there are chickens in trees (see previous post). Erin is working towards her PhD in Engineering at Berkeley, and I have known her for many years. She’s logical, highly intelligent, and known to be honest; her testimony would be rock-solid had she not spent the past two years in a city which functions as a giant bong. It is the Berkeley-bong variable which causes me to question the evidence she has presented.
Erin offered this video as proof that chickens do, in fact, dwell in trees.
The video, while dated, appears to be well-researched and produced, and as a Sesame Street offering, it does have some credibility.
At first look The Pig seems to be an honest, reliable pig, and the chickens seem to have roosted in the tree of their own accord. However, he might also be a Berkeley, California pig, and thus we could safely assume he is a stoner pig and not a credible source of poultry information.
The Rooster also seems like a upright individual, and his British accent lends gravitas to his message. Also, he is a fowl himself, and thus has inherent knowledge his species.
Another factor to be considered is this: after learning from The Rooster that chickens do not live in trees, The Pig calls the chickens down from their branches, but addresses them as “fellas.” This could indicate that a) The Pig does not know chickens are female, because he has no real poultry experience, and is attempting to mislead us, or b) is a stoner from Berkeley and not to be trusted.
Additionally, the influence and control he exerts over the chickens at the end of his song is worrisome. The chickens heed The Pig’s command to get out of the tree and this causes me to question if the chickens did, in fact, roost in the branches of their own accord, or if it was only his hold over them which caused their unlikely roosting in the first place. This is how cults work, you know.
I don’t want to condemn the pig, but I find his story to be of questionable validity.