War Room Lounge v188: Tittle Pending Suggestions Whalecome

Status
Not open for further replies.
Let's see if any of these idiot women know that Ancient Egypt was filled with necrophiliacs.
 
@Fawlty Actually, I might consider adopting a pigeon someday. Apparently, there are lots of adoptable pigeons in Chicago because of an elicit pigeon racing circuit.
 
@salamander re: "Watchu rooting through my hamper for?"
https://forums.sherdog.com/posts/162571981/
Did you not see the post I quoted where we agreed on a sher-bet but then it wasn't finalized? It was a while ago, I had forgotten all about it and I don't think it made it into the bet thread, and I wouldn't expect you to fulfill the terms necessarily, but I'm gonna count it as a win nevertheless since it was an all but done deal.

Aside from that, how ya been? I tagged you days ago; why you hidin'?
 
tonni said:
I really can't watch tv shows by myself, I can do a couple of episodes and then I'm super bored. But yeah, you need to buy me a TV please.
Click to expand...

49986987135916Uris.JPG


Coming right up
 
@Trotsky


I’m actually trying to spend less time here so I can focus on career stuff. I like the lounge, but it distracts me during the day (which was kind of the point) and I’m not great at compartmentalizing, so it’s easier for me to just cut most of it out. The last time I made a conscious effort away from this place was for the same reasons before Covid happened. I’ll pop in every now and then to share interesting links, dumb memes or whatnot. I definitely won’t be moving to reddit @JDragon


Speaking of links, here’s another good one @Jack V Savage @Fawlty


https://theconversation.com/conserv...do-when-evaluating-scientific-evidence-149132


The big idea
Conservatives tend to see expert evidence and personal experience as more equally legitimate than liberals, who put a lot more weight on the scientific perspective, according to our new study published in the journal Political Psychology.

Our findings add nuance to a common claim that conservatives want to hear “both sides” of arguments, even for settled science that’s not really up for debate.

We asked 913 American adults to read an excerpt from an article debunking a common misconception, such as the existence of “lucky streaks” in games of chance. The article quoted a scientist explaining why people hold the misconception – for instance, people tend to see patterns in random data. The article also included a dissenting voice that drew from personal experience – such as someone claiming to have seen lucky streaks firsthand.

Our participants read one of two versions of the article. One version presented the dissenting voice as a quote from someone with relevant professional experience but no scientific expertise, such as a casino manager. In the other version, the dissenting opinion was a comment at the bottom from a random previous participant in our study who also disagreed with the scientist but had no clearly relevant expertise – analogous to a random poster in the comment section of an online article.

Though both liberals and conservatives tended to see the researcher as more legitimate overall, conservatives see less of a difference in legitimacy between the expert and the dissenter.

Why it matters
Looking at both our studies together, while about three-quarters of liberals rated the researcher as more legitimate, just over half of conservatives did. Additionally, about two-thirds of those who favored the anecdotal voice were conservative. Our data also showed that conservatives’ tendency to trust their intuitions accounted for the ideological split.

Other studies of a scientific ideological divide have focused on politicized issues like climate change, where conservatives, who are more likely to oppose regulation, may believe they have something to lose if policies to curb climate change are implemented. By using apolitical topics in our studies, we’ve shown that science denial isn’t just a matter of self-interest.

In stripping away political interest, we have revealed something more basic about how conservatives and liberals differ in the ways they interact with evidence. Conservatives are more likely to see intuitive, direct experience as legitimate. Scientific evidence, then, may become just another viewpoint.

Though we conducted these studies in 2018 before the pandemic, they help explain some of the ideological reactions to it in the U.S.

Among conservatives especially, the idea that the pandemic itself is not a major threat can hold as long as there’s personal evidence on offer that supports that view. President Donald Trump’s recovery from COVID-19 and his assertion based on his own experience that the disease is not so bad would have bolstered this belief. Recommendations from researchers to wear masks can remain mere suggestions so long as the court of public opinion is still undecided.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

SakurabasEar
  • Locked
Social War Room Lounge 318: Propaganda Extravaganza
49 50 51
Replies
1K
Views
30K
LMP
LMP

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,896
Messages
55,453,253
Members
174,784
Latest member
Username Required LMAO

Share this page

Back
Top