Is there any half-arsed theory about human nature that some limited experiment on lab rats can't sort of prove if you have enough lab rats to do the experiment on? I suggest we experiment on lab rats to find out the answer, which is undoubtedly 'true', or possibly 'maybe', but especially if you don't think about it. I'm not exactly sure how to set that experiment up, but here is a picture of a lab rat.
UPDATE! - Graphs! Graphs are almost as good as lab rats at proving anything about everything or everything about anything, although they don't have twitchy little pink noses and wiggly little furry ears, so that's a point that counts against them. But still. Graphs are great at proving stuff, aren't they, much better than scientific proof, which can only prove somethings sometimes and even then only to a limited extent, which is just kind of annoying. To prove how great graphs are, let's do an experiment with lab rats, or maybe graphs, or lab rats running on graphs. It would definitely work.
This graph totally proves I'm right.