Freak!
I think that you might be on the slippery slope of a singularity…
Heretic!
Back in the day we had Kermit and Miss Piggy visit the television show I was working on. I asked one of the crew members if I should go out there. “Only if you want your childhood ruined,” he replied.
I stayed in the control room.
I feel cheated! I was looking forward to some test which could explain my politics to me.
Yeah, well the bearded hominid inside the bird is named Caroll, which is also pretty damn confusing when you’re three.
The world is a layers of lies an infinity deep.
Even if they say that they don’t like “Country?”
o triangle
o square
o heptadecagon
DAMN MY LIBERAL BIAS !!1!!!
Wait, um, the bird had sideburns?
Betteridge’s Law?
Too late - everyone knows about Denise now anyway.
Secret Cultural Marxist, I’m afraid…
I have spent too much time at Retraction Watch, and have come to suspect that clickbait Social Psychology papers like this can be divided into the ones that have been retracted already (due to faked data or sloppy statistics), and the ones where the retraction is still in the future.
It was the 1970s, man. Males had sideburns for some reason before they realized they were ridiculous.
Maybe somebody could come up with a test to predict if somebody is going to have to retract a paper – if they are doing either social psychology or stem cell research the probability is high.
You libruls make me sick!
My work is done.
This is also of a piece of conservatives seeing the world in terms of threat-assessment. If it’s different, they want to know about it. Maybe that’s rough edges in modern society, but it’s a pretty clear evolutionary advantage.
Threat assessment is a useful thing to do. If it is not known-good or known-bad, it is unknown and therefore either unknown-good or unknown-bad. Given that good can make you happy for a day but bad can make you dead for the rest of your life, the bias towards avoiding the unknown at least until it can be reclassified as known-good is a pretty logical thing to do.