@ThePhilosopony  
yeah, that’s what I was going to say. the definition of proof itself is formed from experience, so you can’t deny a proof on the assumption that subjective experience doesn’t count. it’s like trying to deny we taste anything, because we might not really be tasting it. I think it’s possible to prove something is green, even if at a later date it turns out to be grue. truth is ultimately limited by what we have experienced so far. everything unobservable simply can’t be taken into consideration, until it is observable.
 
but maybe I just really wanted derpy to get her muffin.

The muffins existence is predicated by actually being able to talk about the muffin at all what is up for debate however is the form that the muffin takes e.g. dream, spell, hallucination but the actual muffins existence is undoubted from the mere fact that there is even a muffin to talk about in the first place.

“Cogito ergo sum”  
“I think therefore i am” - rene descartes

@Latios381  
I assume Philosopony, that’s the closest thing the artist has revealed as a name.

You said that I could have the muffin if I could prove it’s existence. That in of itself is your acknowledgement of its existence.  
The blueberries, however…  
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/20/news/la-heb-fake-blueberries-20110120

cute pony. what’s her name (the green one)?

Ha~! :3

wht is making this even funnier to me is that i have hitchens vd berlinski debate in the background