That really is the question here, isn't it? You heard that right, genius here is going philosophical on me. When he realized that a few hours ago a new year has started, he asked me if that meant to be or not to be a year older. I wonder where he go that idea from and so he tried to explain it to me. In his logic 2013 minus the year he was born in equals one more than 2012 minus the year of his birth. So, he concluded, we both just turned a year older. Ooooook or as dear old Shakespeare would say: no, duh! But then Trapper made a very good point and now I am the one wondering if he isn't right - kind of.
Don't take it that hard, Hunter, I know you're good at literature but I'm good at math and logic. So far nobody has explained that specific question to me or finished it for that matter. To be or not to be WHAT? It could be any number of things, right? My math adds up and so I can't be far off except if I accept your reasoning that one turns a year older every 365 or 366 days after ones birthday, depending on whether or not we have a leap year. Then again I say: today I am exactly one year older than on January 1, 2012. So we both are right, are we?
Yeah, I guess we are. Why do humans have to make things so confusing? I for one don't feel any different than what I did yesterday or the day before. I think they just make that stuff up to confuse us and try to make us think they are so much smarter than we are. They have no idea! We, that is you and I Trapper, just found the answer to the question everyone has been asking for over 400 years. The correct answer to "to be or not to be" is "depends on how you look at it".
With that thought (and added wisdom) we wish you all a happy 2013.
See you aroundhunter and trapper
PS: don't forget to read André's and Sue's blogs (listed on the side), too and to follow our trip on Google map and on facebook. You can also check our web site for more pictures.