New Study PROVES Liberals Are Smarter Than Conservatards!!!

02/05/201822 Comments

Take that, Repugs!

Click here to watch this video on DTube / Minds.com / SPKOUT / YouTube

SHOW NOTES:
6 in 10 of you will share this link without reading it, a new, depressing study says

Study: 70% of Facebook users only read the headline of science stories before commenting

My tweet of the headline

On this Day in the Annals of Mind-Boggling Government Stupidity – the feds banned slice bread in 1943

My fav Twitter response ever? Only “arrogant assholes” read entire articles before commenting. Now I finally understand Twitter!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

Filed in: Videos
Tagged with:

Comments (22)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Leigh Stewy says:

    Thanks to Twitter, people are no longer interested in reading more than 140 characters, Their attention span won’t allow it. The masses need the ‘instant gratification’ or ‘instant information’ induced by the technocrats that propels the divide and conquer method as well as the war on information. It will be very interesting to see what happens with this!

  2. john.o says:

    No one ever reads anything anymore!

    Especially scrambled Latin. I was fascinated by the filler text “Lorem ipsum” etc.,the first I saw it.

    It is scrambled Cicero. In the original, unscrambled, he is writing to defend the epicurean principle of pleasure as the motivating factor in humans.

    “The wise man…rejects pleasures to secure other greater pleasures, or else he endures pains to avoid worse pains.”

    Not too sure if they consider reading an article entirely a pleasure to forgo for a future pleasure or a pain not to be endured because it prevents no future pain.

    Or maybe they are just fools.

  3. oeo says:

    xx
    In the houses of shadow, everybody Lies.. From Ultra to Phoenix to P2OG..GLADIO, false flags coming out our ears. perception management techniques pulled from the torture of innocence…Algorithms, lies, deceit, mis/disinformation, IIO experts in tradecraft trained to fuck us up.
    Welcome to the next day of stumble and fail ‘)
    You got to laugh.

  4. Airean says:

    But Mr. Corbett – as an experiment it is already skewed by the title. Because of the title alone, most conservative-leaning types won’t look further and would be more likely to leave a quip about it. I only looked into it because it was out of charactor coming from you, and not because I delve past all such headlines and titles on media. I don’t comment on those types of headlines because there is no point wasting time on stupidity. Also, there have been several similarly entitled articles touting apparently actual “studies” meant to be taken seriously, in the news and social media – and this would just seem like one more of the same. Sorry, but the only objections will come from conservative-leaning people and iif they wouldn’t delve deeper into one more headline among previous others claiming the same nonsense, I don’t think we can draw any useful conclusions from it. In general, I dont think exercises attempting to show us how unreasonable and incapable we are, are very useful. We have to be better at getting thru to people who believe their tv’s and political parties and I think you are usually among the very best at doing that.

    • brian.s says:

      I second this view.
      A negatively defined ‘identity’ that uses ‘put down’, smear and derisory terms to frame and support its assertions is a distortion filter that sees what it wants to see in the way it wants to see it.

      I felt a dissonance with the headline and The Corbett Report – and a curiosity to see what you were up to meant that I watched where ordinarily such titles operate provocative clickbait to react.

      There are times when a clearly felt false predicate saves the time of listening to something exposing to its influence or giving it attention, is a true discernment.

      A sense of intent to manipulate or deceive is a self-honesty that can see it and say ‘thanks but no thanks’.
      Most of the subliminal messaging and framing is done by headline memes.
      You might do more to identify and deconstruct such insinuations and seemingly authoritative assertion than seek to verify what Media and mind manipulation has known since way back when.

      You could also shine a bit of light on the corrupt nature of much of the ‘study’ literature, bought ‘science’ and medical tyranny. But it might be that the sideshow politics that allows more critics to the fray gives a stronger discouragement to where ‘power’ operates by stealth.

      • john.o says:

        Or perhaps you could see that this is a didactic “practical joke,” aggressive, to some extent, as ALL humor is, and just chuckle along with us and LEARN from it and your own reaction to it, if chuckling is not it. Does it bother you?

        Just my reaction to you, but I hear a humorless moralism in your sermons, which hides its own aggression, a need to tell the world and others what to do and how to be, a desire to squelch confrontation and the aggression of OTHERS and wrap them up in instructions from the wise.

        And if I understand Airean, that post completely misses the point. This is no “experiment” in the scientific sense, but in the educational sense.

        Some of us like to fight, argue and make fun. No need to participate, but…

        Get used to it?

        • Airean says:

          Mr Corbett said it was meant as an experiment and of course humour is part of the excercise. It is too tiresome to even speculate on any question of whether “scientific” or “educational” terms need to bog down the exercise. My point was that no useful conclusions can can come from it because it is skewed on two points 1) Liberals and Conservatives will react differently because of the title – Conservatives will most likely not delve into it and 2) In just the past few years there have been numerous “studies” , most likely conducted by illogical lower IQ’s, claiming much the same nonsense according to articles frequently circulating in mainstream news and on social media – and which were not floated as a humerous experiment. This can be easily googled (intelligence IQ liberals conservatives). So no doubt conservatives have developed a different attitude towards such incompetent “studies” and are even less inclined to read yet another one.
          On humour vs logic, granted. But the experiment is skewed and the results will likely be more humerous – or interesting – to some than others, depending on leanings – which pretty much negates the excercise . Just like all the previous articles on similar such “studies”.

          • john.o says:

            I took his “experiment” to mean we will find out what happens, and indeed, we will.

            Even those of us with low IQs.

            Did I just hear someone complaining about scientific rigor mention “IQ”? IQ is a marketing term with no scientific validity whatsoever.

            • Airean says:

              The only person who introduced “science” into the discussion was yourself. As you also introduced “educational”. And then you went right ahead and corrected me on something that I never mentioned nor implied using your notions of “scientific” vs “educational”. Anyway good to know someone is anticipating “educational” results. And thank you for a very insightful exchange , I’ve often wondered what process such educational studies resulted from.

              • john.o says:

                “as an experiment it is already skewed by the title”

                To my mind, no experiment is skewed apart from “science.” The word more generally simply means you try something and see what happens. How could such an endeavor be skewed?

                Maybe I am wrong and James Corbett feels he is testing some hypothesis and could see “skewed” results. I suppose generally I myself expect people will react a certain way.

                But I agree with you, the basic principle is well documented already. As is “heat rises.” But every once in a while it’s fun to send up a Hot Air Balloon and see what happens. If it doesn’t rise, it probably is the balloon, not the principle.

              • Airean says:

                I guess we need to just leave it at your explanation that you don’t understand how experiments can result in predetermined – or skewed – outcomes as a result of their design, which obviously not all of us would find unenlightening or unamusing.

              • john.o says:

                I guess we’ll just leave it that you did not understand what I wrote.

                I understand perfectly well how experiments can be skewed. Scientific experiments with predicted outcomes meant to support or eliminate a hypothesis can obviously be skewed by design.

                But that is not what I see here. To my ears, influenced by a culture that sees science as the new arbiter of all meaning and value, you sound as if you lost the ordinary meaning of the word: “something tried.” This meaning implies no expected outcome relative to a hypothesis at all. Most “experiments” simply cannot be skewed. One simply tries something and finds out what happens.

                (The word once meant an attempt at casting a magic spell, too, but that, and the scientific meaning are specialized applications.)

              • Airean says:

                Well, once again, you have to bog down in “science” which you explain is due to your “ears, influenced by a culture that sees science as the new arbiter of all meaning and value” . At least you are very self-insightful. “Science” to some of us is merely a method, and I still can’t understand why you continue to sidetrack about it, but I guess we have to take you at your word that you are unduly influenced by your culture’s emphasis on it.

  5. redrose says:

    Newspapers do this, too. Long before social media, I learned to always read the whole article, because in news stories, the truth (if any) is always at the end, because most readers don’t read to end….

  6. VoltaicDude says:

    Well…I dunno…

    I’m undecided on this one ‘cause I really do believe that Liberals are smarter than Conservatards.

    That’s why they call them Conservatards!

    Duuuh.

    But I was surprised that 70% of twits do that!

    I thought it was just me.

  7. joseph says:

    I love it! Meta-trolling. Salute the master of the troll within the troll. “How dare you troll me you arrogant ass!”. I’m dying over here… absolutely hilarious. This and the sciencepost…

  8. brian.s says:

    “6 in 10 of you will share this link without reading it”

    The liability to share something that seems likely to present oneself in a positive light or receive a positive reflection is perhaps the primary block to healing. Why” Because healing – or transformation is not the dissemination and association in information – but letting something in that truly changes me – or nurtures a true willingness for change in me.

    Another way of saying this is we fear to be alone and use everything to support the mask or persona that covers over such fears.

    Different personality types operate different strategies to cover over or escape variation on the same theme.
    Clever thinking can operate obfuscation and diversions of manipulative intent, while others limit consciousness so as not to feel the pain.

    Feeling crap about our life plays into those who invite and encourage us to crap on others.

    Why do different people operate from completely different definitions of self and world – such as to seem unworthy, despicable or evil to each other’s view? Perhaps because we presume the world runs according to the model we assign true?

  9. manbearpig says:

    As a student spoke to me avidly yesterday about Uma Thurman’s up-close-and-personal interview in the New York Times about her own Hollywood rape story and murder allegations entitled “This is Why Uma Thurman is Angry” ( o la la !) complete with hagard photo…

    it all became exceedingly clear again how all stops are being pulled out to cancel rational understanding and

    PUSH THE RAGE BUTTON.

    News and nearly every other sort of media is all and only about that:

    Pushing the rage buttons. Everything has become “offensive”, and the only so-called ‘thinking’ most anyone is doing now is ‘Hating’.

    I had the most cathartic, satisfying laugh I’d had in a while yesterday. (though it too was anger motivated, I cannot deny):

    A student asked me “If you could have lunch with anyone at all in the world who would it be?”

    I reflected a moment and answered quite seriously: “Bashar Al-Assad”.

    The expression on the person’s face was just… So priceless… just impossible…to describe…

    Anyway, after a few lost and lonely moments where he truly knew not what to think he said: “I don’t even understand why this man hasn’t been shot.” (hesitation) “NO really, I don’t think this person is interesting at all. No, I’m not intersted in dicators.”

    Though this 50-year old student would be the first to complain of the lying medias, somehow it didn’t pertain to Syria, and even suggesting that I was keen on understanding the Syrian leader’s point of view of everything that was destroying his country was utterly incongruous and hopelessly incomprehensible to this otherwise delightful person.

    Actually the hilarity came later the same day when I told this story to an Iranian student.

    Laughing to tears at how profoundly and successfully conditioned the world has been to Despise…to despise Bashar Al-Assad…and all the other Bashars

    felt really good.

    Damn ConsrvaTARDS!

  10. john.o says:

    Badass Basher?
    You idol smasher!
    Do please consider your error
    He’ll weep and wail
    You’ll eat Russian Kale
    and end an Apostle of Terror

    Humans is louses
    a pox on all houses!
    let ’em eat GMO cake!
    except I do see
    Humans am me
    on second thought, give ’em a break

    • manbearpig says:

      I’d forgotten to mention above that I’d had two students in a row that morning who’d stated verbatim that they “hated” Bashar al-Assad. One of them worked for the regional news outlet.

      I once had a student who was a journalist at AP… but only once… she never came back…?

      I have to admit I like showing students just a couple minutes of the video documenting Asma Al-Assad’s conference in Paris in 2010, part 2 (for the benefit of Christine Lagarde among other “elites”…) So gentle, brilliant, sincere, well-spoken… another Idol Basher…

      and your laconic ‘dangerous russian kale’ query yesterday was a killer..

      I shall now go spurn my toast…

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to Top