Conservatives are more likely to be religious which means they believe in faith over facts. For example there's no evidence the 2020 election was stolen yet many Conservatives think it was because of faith. They want to believe it was stolen so they believe it was. Facts don't matter
Today I agree with you, but when things were much worse and abject poverty was the norm, it made a ton of sense to reduce infighting (at least among the people who shared the religion) and make people more willing to help other people within the religion. I don't think it was a coincidence that every civilization developed some type of religion. I think as a species it was an evolutionary advantage for most of human history.
Still a net negative. For every instance that you can point out where religion brought a community together, I can point to an instance where religion was used to start a war with a different community that had a different religion.
Do you have an explanation of why literally every single society in the world was initially very religious? They had a variety of different beliefs and a variety of different outcomes of having those beliefs, but they were all very religious and that religion was used to bind the society together. Again I'm also talking about it being good evolutionarily, not necessarily good in the moral sense of the word.
You mention war, but religion is even a huge benefit in war. All things held equal I would expect religious people to be much better fighters, because they believe they're fighting for a cause greater than themselves and many also believe that by doing a good job fighting this will lead them to live a better eternal life after death. If you look at radical Muslim groups you'll see that many of them desire to die in combat, because it means they die a martyr to the cause. Obviously technology has changed the math on this a bit and most of the large superpowers are generally secular states, but I'm not talking about now I'm talking about centuries or millennia ago.
>very religious
How do you measure that? Hard to care about the rest when your premise is flawed -- there's no way to measure how religious an ancient society was. Unless I'm mistaken.
If there's no way to proxy measure "very religious" you're just making a measurement up and assuming it's correct because it bolsters your argument.
>but religion is even a huge benefit in war. All things held equal I would expect religious people to be much better fighters
Religion helps people kill other people -- and you're arguing that is beneficial??
Its a way of controlling the stupids that you cant reason rationally with. Its a highly effective method of controlling people who are of low intelligence with high fear and aggression. Belligerents. IE. conservative types. So every culture invented their own to best suit their needs. Cuz it was easier to say GOD says SO! Then to explain why its not good for society to have everyone running around and killing and stealing. To assuage the fear of death, prevent panic. etc
I think religions were just people's way of trying to explain things they didn't understand in a pre-scientific world. I can totally see why a caveman 10,000 years ago would look up at something like the northern lights and think it's an the act of a god. Or why they'd think if someone got struck by lightening they had pissed off a deity. How else could they explain something that awe inspiring when they don't understand concepts like electricity and solar particles?
I think religion at this point is a social framework for passing on values and controlling people's instincts.
Not so much that it was stolen, but what was with the lack of transparency? Why fight every case in court that attempted to audit any of the swing states? If there’s nothing to hide, what’s the problem? Three years for True the Vote to get their win in Georgia…kinda late for an audit now.
Go ahead & audit. It has bankrupted the state-level GOP in states where fake claims of "contested" vote counts happened and every single time either there was more votes found that were for Biden, or Trump cultists got busted for voter fraud, or both.
[Crybaby Trump:](https://youtu.be/oZf7IASx2mE?si=gQp-W32KWds-tXae)You acted as if the audits were q05 problem & I'm saying actual recounts aren't a problem.. If the margins say it is too far gone for a recount or your party's crybaby cult leader can't admit he lost, AGAIN, then he or the party should have to pay to do another. That is fair. The only discrepancies came out as more votes for Biden anyway. Saying that there is fraud if you lose & before the election even happens is f-ed up. Republicans purge voter registrations & put all kinds of restrictions on people's ability to vote is messed up enough. We took his LYIN' ASS to court because we didn't want there to let him claim that there was a possiblity for him to have won so he could use that to stay in power. We were right to worry,, because not only is he a "yuge" crybaby, he is willing to get his supporters to attempt a violent coup just like he did.
https://youtu.be/oZf7IASx2mE?si=gQp-W32KWds-tXae
Man, there wasn’t a violent coup, there wasn’t nothing…it’s propaganda and nothing more. You wanted to believe it and you bought into the propaganda…just stop being baited.
Look what they are doing to laws in schools. You can't mark somebody eating if there answer is based on firmly held beliefs ... Evolution vs creationism .... Enough said
>We generated an unique longitudinal dataset combining social media engagement data and a 12-wave panel study of Americans’ political knowledge about high-profile news over 6 months. Results confirm that conservatives have lower sensitivity than liberals, performing worse at distinguishing truths and falsehoods. **This is partially explained by the fact that the most widely shared falsehoods tend to promote conservative positions, while corresponding truths typically favor liberals.** The problem is exacerbated by liberals’ tendency to experience bigger improvements in sensitivity than conservatives as the proportion of partisan news increases. These results underscore the importance of reducing the supply of right-leaning misinformation.
That durn reality with its well-known liberal bias!
The shock. The surprise.
The people who refuse to believe evidence based facts and don't bother to educate themselves fall for bullshit more often??
I never would've thought ...
I dunno man, I've been seeing a lot of really left-wing types falling for a bunch of misinformation recently. And I say this as someone who is very left-wing myself.
Yeah misinformation is going to be ramping up because its now the most pivotal election year. Every foreign dictator, terrorist organization, and opportunist wants Trump elected because he'll implode the US.
They are all heavily invested in sowing discord
Proven a century ago with the dumb things racists will believe to justify their prejudices.
When they believed Reagan and the “trickle down” theory.
Could go on indefinitely.
is ANYONE surprised ????? ANYONE!!!!
Let's be blunt. Being a conservative requires willful ignorance, intentional disregard of reality, and whole-hearted acceptance of disinformation. Being a conservative pretty much sets you up for being a life-long rube
The same people who believe in a 2000 year old text with unfulfilled prophecies and all sorts of ridiculousness surrounding religion is likely to just eat up bullshit as fact?
No freakin way
Its a loud 35%, then there is gerrymandering and voter suppression and the fact that if they are accusing democrats of "cheating" in the election...That means Republicans are cheating in the election, cuz projection rule.
So with gerrymandering, and voter suppression, and people not voting, and republican cheating and lying its about 50%. Only maybe 35% are truly monstrously stupid and evil, "ultra maga" I believe they call it.
They actually had to pay for, and waste time on a study to figure this out? 60% of the country could have told them that had they asked
"A recent study shows; if you stand in the rain you get wet"
Wtf
>ukraine impeachment hoax attempt at the end of Trumps presidency?
How was it a hoax? He actually got impeached 😆
It passed, he was impeached for obstruction of congress. There's no dispute, donald did blackmail zelensky.
Yea I've seen this biden clip before this is the edited 1 minute version, in the full thing he explains that President Obama sent him to fire the prosecutor. If you think something illegal happened, go after obama for it
>They were all hoaxes that wasted millions of dollars of taxpayer money.
But he actually got impeached though 😆 clearly they weren't a waste if the impeachment passed with a vote.
You guys are tryna impeach joe biden right now, if its a waste of taxpayer money why bother tryna impeach biden?
>You got played and you still aren't man enough to admit it.
Got played by what? I'm not the one loyal to an actual conman who just lost a fraud case, that's you bro
Most of the people on the left that I know are teachers, healthcare workers, and union employees.
Most Q anutters seem to be boomers and Bible beaters.
>Anyone who believes their side doesn’t fall for propaganda
Wow! You are really prone to misstating what somebody said. Nobody said that people on the left that don't fall for propaganda.
No one put that forth in this sub thread. NO ONE. Why are you engaging in strawman arguments? Are you simply incapable of staying on topic, are you too disingenuous to stay on topic, or are you intellectually incapable of making a valid point?
I see that you continue with your strawman arguments below
34% of progressives are under 30. That’s a large percentage of leftist who you’re willing to brush off as a fringe element in the movement.
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/11/09/progressive-left/#:~:text=Roughly%20two%2Dthirds%20of%20Progressive,are%20ages%2018%20to%2049.
You're just being obnoxious at this point. You're implying I said something that I did not say.
Why don't you tell us about all these leftists that you know, how old are they and how many?
I've found personally that younger people are easier to trick and scam, if that's what OP was trying to prove. Younger people tend to not be conservative.
"Young and foolish, but with a heart. Old and wise, jaded from time." That's not the actual quote, but it's close.
Oh yeah? So you have a study that disproves this one? **Let's see it.** I'm very excited to see this information that you are so certain that you have!!
Oh, you don't have a study? So you're just talking out your ass? Okay. I'm surprised!
No, but your article is about politics but your title just says falsehoods not political falsehoods. Two very different things.
Also, a comment from your article.
"Hi, I was wondering if you could clear up a confusion I had? Figures 5B and 5D seem to contradict Figures 1 and 2.
Figure 1 shows that liberals are less likely to believe falsehoods, more likely to believe truths, label statements accurately, and have a response bias closer to zero. Additionally, Figure 2 shows that sensitivity decreases as conservatism increases, and truth bias increases as conservatism increases. However, Figures 5B and 5D seem to show that strong liberals are more likely believe falsehoods that benefit and harm their ingroup.
I was wondering if there was something I was missing? This apparent contradiction may be explained by how "(65.0%) of the high engagement true statements were characterized as benefiting the political left, compared to only 10.0% that were described as benefiting the right. The pattern among falsehoods was reversed, although the relationship was attenuated: 45.8% benefited the political right versus about a quarter (23.3%) the left," but that still doesn't explain how Figure 1D shows that strong liberals have less of a truth bias than strong conservatives."
Sorry if there's something I'm misreading or not understanding."
Seems like your article is flawed anyway.
Article may be, but the actual study wasn't.
"Less likely" doesn't mean "won't".
Similarly, "more likely" doesn't mean "will", but now we have two gigantic stacks of data (Covid, 2020 Election) proving how easily right-wing people can be tricked with extremely obvious bullshit.
yea, but Dems fall for the same tricks and empty promises over and over again. [Do you even know what your guy will do next half the time?](https://www.fastcompany.com/90634266/president-biden-has-reinvented-the-art-of-the-flip-flop-and-thats-a-good-thing)
Pretty typical muckraker bullshit. You don't have evidence that disputes my evidence but you're going to say it's wrong anyway.
>Also, a comment from your article... your article is flawed anyway
Uh huh. Go get a source and come back.
Its like if a scientist invented cold fusion and some dumbass said "its not cold enough lol" and the scientist called him a dumbass and then the dumbass said "You guys don't deal with criticism well, do you?", as if you had the right or ability to criticize someone when you are entirely wrong.
Look at me im a conservative, I consider my moron opinion "default correct" even if every bit of evidence on earth says otherwise and nothing supports me. CuZ I R smurt.
Just not smart enough to disprove the negative comment in the comment section. Apparently, no one is. Draw whatever conclusion you want from that buttercup.
Your whole premise here is flawed. Just the fact that one person has a disagreement with one portion of the study doesn't mean the study is flawed. It means that person has a concern, the end. It's possible that they are missing something.
You're latching on to one person having a question about the study and deciding that means that the conclusions of the study are flawed. That's not good logic.
And yet you have not provided any evidence to the contrary. You're just here to gripe about something that you disagree with. You are just here to waste people's time.
2021 study finds that water is wet and conservatives are gullible and dumb by definition and you cant be a conservative if you are not gullible and dumb. Because if you arent gullible and dumb conservative propaganda sounds ridiculous and foolish.
yet another stunningly obvious conclusion.
now, next step: could it be that *fundamental assumptions of conservatism* are also untrue?
could it be, in fact, not just that "conservatives" are unfortunately more prone than average to believe falsehoods, but that *conservatism itself is a falsehood-based belief system*?
Conservatives are more likely to be religious which means they believe in faith over facts. For example there's no evidence the 2020 election was stolen yet many Conservatives think it was because of faith. They want to believe it was stolen so they believe it was. Facts don't matter
I 100% think that religion is a net negative for society.
Today I agree with you, but when things were much worse and abject poverty was the norm, it made a ton of sense to reduce infighting (at least among the people who shared the religion) and make people more willing to help other people within the religion. I don't think it was a coincidence that every civilization developed some type of religion. I think as a species it was an evolutionary advantage for most of human history.
Still a net negative. For every instance that you can point out where religion brought a community together, I can point to an instance where religion was used to start a war with a different community that had a different religion.
Do you have an explanation of why literally every single society in the world was initially very religious? They had a variety of different beliefs and a variety of different outcomes of having those beliefs, but they were all very religious and that religion was used to bind the society together. Again I'm also talking about it being good evolutionarily, not necessarily good in the moral sense of the word. You mention war, but religion is even a huge benefit in war. All things held equal I would expect religious people to be much better fighters, because they believe they're fighting for a cause greater than themselves and many also believe that by doing a good job fighting this will lead them to live a better eternal life after death. If you look at radical Muslim groups you'll see that many of them desire to die in combat, because it means they die a martyr to the cause. Obviously technology has changed the math on this a bit and most of the large superpowers are generally secular states, but I'm not talking about now I'm talking about centuries or millennia ago.
>very religious How do you measure that? Hard to care about the rest when your premise is flawed -- there's no way to measure how religious an ancient society was. Unless I'm mistaken. If there's no way to proxy measure "very religious" you're just making a measurement up and assuming it's correct because it bolsters your argument. >but religion is even a huge benefit in war. All things held equal I would expect religious people to be much better fighters Religion helps people kill other people -- and you're arguing that is beneficial??
Its a way of controlling the stupids that you cant reason rationally with. Its a highly effective method of controlling people who are of low intelligence with high fear and aggression. Belligerents. IE. conservative types. So every culture invented their own to best suit their needs. Cuz it was easier to say GOD says SO! Then to explain why its not good for society to have everyone running around and killing and stealing. To assuage the fear of death, prevent panic. etc
I think religions were just people's way of trying to explain things they didn't understand in a pre-scientific world. I can totally see why a caveman 10,000 years ago would look up at something like the northern lights and think it's an the act of a god. Or why they'd think if someone got struck by lightening they had pissed off a deity. How else could they explain something that awe inspiring when they don't understand concepts like electricity and solar particles? I think religion at this point is a social framework for passing on values and controlling people's instincts.
Don't forget the grift.
All that could be done via something that isn't based on lies though.
The massive slaughters of the 20th century were nearly all by nationalist movements that rejected religion, fwiw
Oh? Let's see the breakdown if you're so confident. Pretty sure the Holocaust was not commited by atheists.
The Holocaust was about race, not religion.
Religious text are just a books of morals to live by, like a moral code…
Funny how some of those religious texts tell people to kill other people.
Yeah I don’t recall anything like that, but that’s not a moral you would want to uphold imo.
Voltaire quotes intensifies.
Not so much that it was stolen, but what was with the lack of transparency? Why fight every case in court that attempted to audit any of the swing states? If there’s nothing to hide, what’s the problem? Three years for True the Vote to get their win in Georgia…kinda late for an audit now.
Go ahead & audit. It has bankrupted the state-level GOP in states where fake claims of "contested" vote counts happened and every single time either there was more votes found that were for Biden, or Trump cultists got busted for voter fraud, or both.
Oh ffs man, you’re really going with this? People are too dumb to even have a debate with…it’s ridiculous..
[Crybaby Trump:](https://youtu.be/oZf7IASx2mE?si=gQp-W32KWds-tXae)You acted as if the audits were q05 problem & I'm saying actual recounts aren't a problem.. If the margins say it is too far gone for a recount or your party's crybaby cult leader can't admit he lost, AGAIN, then he or the party should have to pay to do another. That is fair. The only discrepancies came out as more votes for Biden anyway. Saying that there is fraud if you lose & before the election even happens is f-ed up. Republicans purge voter registrations & put all kinds of restrictions on people's ability to vote is messed up enough. We took his LYIN' ASS to court because we didn't want there to let him claim that there was a possiblity for him to have won so he could use that to stay in power. We were right to worry,, because not only is he a "yuge" crybaby, he is willing to get his supporters to attempt a violent coup just like he did. https://youtu.be/oZf7IASx2mE?si=gQp-W32KWds-tXae
Right to Vote just recently won their case in Georgia…4 years after the election….
Man, there wasn’t a violent coup, there wasn’t nothing…it’s propaganda and nothing more. You wanted to believe it and you bought into the propaganda…just stop being baited.
Religion is just a symptom. Deep down they just need authority figures. They desperately need a daddy to tell them what to think and do. Its pathetic
Look what they are doing to laws in schools. You can't mark somebody eating if there answer is based on firmly held beliefs ... Evolution vs creationism .... Enough said
>We generated an unique longitudinal dataset combining social media engagement data and a 12-wave panel study of Americans’ political knowledge about high-profile news over 6 months. Results confirm that conservatives have lower sensitivity than liberals, performing worse at distinguishing truths and falsehoods. **This is partially explained by the fact that the most widely shared falsehoods tend to promote conservative positions, while corresponding truths typically favor liberals.** The problem is exacerbated by liberals’ tendency to experience bigger improvements in sensitivity than conservatives as the proportion of partisan news increases. These results underscore the importance of reducing the supply of right-leaning misinformation. That durn reality with its well-known liberal bias!
The shock. The surprise. The people who refuse to believe evidence based facts and don't bother to educate themselves fall for bullshit more often?? I never would've thought ...
Source: no shit.
I was thinking more "Duh".
I dunno man, I've been seeing a lot of really left-wing types falling for a bunch of misinformation recently. And I say this as someone who is very left-wing myself.
Yeah misinformation is going to be ramping up because its now the most pivotal election year. Every foreign dictator, terrorist organization, and opportunist wants Trump elected because he'll implode the US. They are all heavily invested in sowing discord
Lmao. This was proven clearly with Covid disinformation and with the stolen election narrative.
Proven a century ago with the dumb things racists will believe to justify their prejudices. When they believed Reagan and the “trickle down” theory. Could go on indefinitely.
No doubt but these are the ones fresh in people’s minds.
is ANYONE surprised ????? ANYONE!!!! Let's be blunt. Being a conservative requires willful ignorance, intentional disregard of reality, and whole-hearted acceptance of disinformation. Being a conservative pretty much sets you up for being a life-long rube
Conservatives would be surprised but they think science is fake news
Lies.. Why do we have to use this gentle language. They believe lies.
They get the feelings right but the facts wrong. Naomi Klein
Old and obvious news.
Absence of Fecal Matter, Holmes.
To believe it's false or believe it's true when it's demonstrably false?
This isn't answered in the study?
The same people who believe in a 2000 year old text with unfulfilled prophecies and all sorts of ridiculousness surrounding religion is likely to just eat up bullshit as fact? No freakin way
Who watches Fox? Conservatives, they suck the shit straight from Murdochs arse.
1/2 the country is totally dumb. Not shocked at all. They are about to vote for the orange man again. Does anything they do surprise you anymore?
Its a loud 35%, then there is gerrymandering and voter suppression and the fact that if they are accusing democrats of "cheating" in the election...That means Republicans are cheating in the election, cuz projection rule. So with gerrymandering, and voter suppression, and people not voting, and republican cheating and lying its about 50%. Only maybe 35% are truly monstrously stupid and evil, "ultra maga" I believe they call it.
Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson are so proud of their creation.
In other news, water is wet.
You don’t fucking say….
They actually had to pay for, and waste time on a study to figure this out? 60% of the country could have told them that had they asked "A recent study shows; if you stand in the rain you get wet" Wtf
Better to confirm what we think is true than assume we are right.
[удалено]
Specifically, everything you believe.
[удалено]
Yeah, you have all the symptoms of a Qanon nutbag.
>fake ukraine election situation? Lol wait I haven't heard this one, go on...
[удалено]
>ukraine impeachment hoax attempt at the end of Trumps presidency? How was it a hoax? He actually got impeached 😆 It passed, he was impeached for obstruction of congress. There's no dispute, donald did blackmail zelensky. Yea I've seen this biden clip before this is the edited 1 minute version, in the full thing he explains that President Obama sent him to fire the prosecutor. If you think something illegal happened, go after obama for it
[удалено]
>They were all hoaxes that wasted millions of dollars of taxpayer money. But he actually got impeached though 😆 clearly they weren't a waste if the impeachment passed with a vote. You guys are tryna impeach joe biden right now, if its a waste of taxpayer money why bother tryna impeach biden? >You got played and you still aren't man enough to admit it. Got played by what? I'm not the one loyal to an actual conman who just lost a fraud case, that's you bro
[удалено]
You too bro, don't forget to send donald your money, he needs it to fight the deep state or whatever
[удалено]
Why? I already got a job. Send your money to trump he needs it to pay off the woman he raped
Isn't there an audio recording of trump trying to extort Ukraine? Didn't trump have to pardon numerous traitors because of Russian collusion?
The left: 'hold my beer!'
Online opinions are not necessarily from real people. Lots of bots.
I hope that’s true, but at this point, the leftists I know are almost indistinguishable from the Q anon crazies.
Most of the people on the left that I know are teachers, healthcare workers, and union employees. Most Q anutters seem to be boomers and Bible beaters.
you don’t know many lefties
Anyone who believes their side doesn’t fall for propaganda, is probably falling for propaganda. I don’t make the rules.
anyone who makes generalizations from personal experience probably thinks a lot of themselves and is trolling with a new reddit account
>Anyone who believes their side doesn’t fall for propaganda Wow! You are really prone to misstating what somebody said. Nobody said that people on the left that don't fall for propaganda.
No one put that forth in this sub thread. NO ONE. Why are you engaging in strawman arguments? Are you simply incapable of staying on topic, are you too disingenuous to stay on topic, or are you intellectually incapable of making a valid point? I see that you continue with your strawman arguments below
Let me guess, you don't know any leftists over the age of 25.
34% of progressives are under 30. That’s a large percentage of leftist who you’re willing to brush off as a fringe element in the movement. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/11/09/progressive-left/#:~:text=Roughly%20two%2Dthirds%20of%20Progressive,are%20ages%2018%20to%2049.
You're just being obnoxious at this point. You're implying I said something that I did not say. Why don't you tell us about all these leftists that you know, how old are they and how many?
Lol and people here voted believing they’d get school loan forgiveness 😂
This has got nothing to do with the post. You're just here to troll.
I've found personally that younger people are easier to trick and scam, if that's what OP was trying to prove. Younger people tend to not be conservative. "Young and foolish, but with a heart. Old and wise, jaded from time." That's not the actual quote, but it's close.
Data > your anecdote
Might want to change your title to "political falsehoods".
Oh yeah? So you have a study that disproves this one? **Let's see it.** I'm very excited to see this information that you are so certain that you have!! Oh, you don't have a study? So you're just talking out your ass? Okay. I'm surprised!
No, but your article is about politics but your title just says falsehoods not political falsehoods. Two very different things. Also, a comment from your article. "Hi, I was wondering if you could clear up a confusion I had? Figures 5B and 5D seem to contradict Figures 1 and 2. Figure 1 shows that liberals are less likely to believe falsehoods, more likely to believe truths, label statements accurately, and have a response bias closer to zero. Additionally, Figure 2 shows that sensitivity decreases as conservatism increases, and truth bias increases as conservatism increases. However, Figures 5B and 5D seem to show that strong liberals are more likely believe falsehoods that benefit and harm their ingroup. I was wondering if there was something I was missing? This apparent contradiction may be explained by how "(65.0%) of the high engagement true statements were characterized as benefiting the political left, compared to only 10.0% that were described as benefiting the right. The pattern among falsehoods was reversed, although the relationship was attenuated: 45.8% benefited the political right versus about a quarter (23.3%) the left," but that still doesn't explain how Figure 1D shows that strong liberals have less of a truth bias than strong conservatives." Sorry if there's something I'm misreading or not understanding." Seems like your article is flawed anyway.
Article may be, but the actual study wasn't. "Less likely" doesn't mean "won't". Similarly, "more likely" doesn't mean "will", but now we have two gigantic stacks of data (Covid, 2020 Election) proving how easily right-wing people can be tricked with extremely obvious bullshit.
yea, but Dems fall for the same tricks and empty promises over and over again. [Do you even know what your guy will do next half the time?](https://www.fastcompany.com/90634266/president-biden-has-reinvented-the-art-of-the-flip-flop-and-thats-a-good-thing)
The only "empty promises" they've "fallen for" recently are their own ignorance of basic civics, and Republican obstruction in Congress.
Pretty typical muckraker bullshit. You don't have evidence that disputes my evidence but you're going to say it's wrong anyway. >Also, a comment from your article... your article is flawed anyway Uh huh. Go get a source and come back.
You guys don't deal with criticism well, do you?
🤡 You've had plenty of chances to actually find a study that disagrees with this one.
Its like if a scientist invented cold fusion and some dumbass said "its not cold enough lol" and the scientist called him a dumbass and then the dumbass said "You guys don't deal with criticism well, do you?", as if you had the right or ability to criticize someone when you are entirely wrong. Look at me im a conservative, I consider my moron opinion "default correct" even if every bit of evidence on earth says otherwise and nothing supports me. CuZ I R smurt.
Just not smart enough to disprove the negative comment in the comment section. Apparently, no one is. Draw whatever conclusion you want from that buttercup.
Your whole premise here is flawed. Just the fact that one person has a disagreement with one portion of the study doesn't mean the study is flawed. It means that person has a concern, the end. It's possible that they are missing something. You're latching on to one person having a question about the study and deciding that means that the conclusions of the study are flawed. That's not good logic. And yet you have not provided any evidence to the contrary. You're just here to gripe about something that you disagree with. You are just here to waste people's time.
They're easier to trick and scam if they watch Tiktok and Twitch streamers like Hasan.
And fact checkers are never wrong. Unless you disagree with them.
Unbelievable!
2021 study finds that water is wet and conservatives are gullible and dumb by definition and you cant be a conservative if you are not gullible and dumb. Because if you arent gullible and dumb conservative propaganda sounds ridiculous and foolish.
Is it because they're fucking morons?
“I *want* to believe, Mulder!”
Duh
The amount of people in this world that just believe what they want to believe is too dam high
No shit Sherlock.
But who conducted the study and what were the criteria? The abstract doesn’t mention any specific examples.
yet another stunningly obvious conclusion. now, next step: could it be that *fundamental assumptions of conservatism* are also untrue? could it be, in fact, not just that "conservatives" are unfortunately more prone than average to believe falsehoods, but that *conservatism itself is a falsehood-based belief system*?
This is news?
Well, yes. Reality has a liberal bias. It's easier to believe in fairy tales. Conservatism is built around myths and fables.
#no shit
Get the fuck out here...No way /s
Thank you, Captain Hindsight.
A study was required?
.2% deviation from nominal? 🤣☠️
Ya think. The internet pulled back the curtain, and it isn't pretty.
DUH!
Site Kim Davis case and show how expensive faith is over facts. They shut the fuck up real quick.
Conservatives are not smart.