💼 Careercow Will Stancil / whstancil / stancilculture - "Vibecession" proponent and Biden booster neolib, the "chihuahua of twitter", Important Master's Degree (in Black People), chooses endurance mode "lolcowing through it" as an argument strategy, "Proud member of Do-Something Twitter", raped by Grok

[Wallace]

The more interesting phenomenon is that of people changing their minds, it would follow. Do they get into that?

The brain prioritizes coherence over truth. If a belief fits neatly with someone’s existing worldview, their brain tends to accept it. This is how confirmation bias works. People instinctively reduce the discomfort of cognitive dissonance by rejecting the new info or rationalizing it away.

Beliefs, even incorrect beliefs, are tied to your identity and your community. Accepting beliefs that run counter to what your community believes puts you at risk of being kicked out of the community. We've evolved to cooperate, not seek out truth. It also doesn't help the Bluesky and similar hugboxes rely upon fear to enforce consensus, which also shuts down the analytical mind. Those on the outside of the community are Unsafe, so you should not listen to them.

If you want to change someone's mind, you have to lower their defenses first. Ask them questions and get them to examine their own reasoning, rather than putting them on the defensive by attacking them. They have to notice the faults in their reasoning by themselves, it doesn't work if you point it out.

 

[I'm a Silly]

If you want to change someone's mind, you have to lower their defenses first. Ask them questions and get them to examine their own reasoning, rather than putting them on the defensive by attacking them. They have to notice the faults in their reasoning by themselves, it doesn't work if you point it out.

This is also my observation. Somehow, on a job interview, I was asked what I thought of a somewhat politicized topic, and we got into how people change their minds. Indeed, people do change their own minds. Even if I were told, "Silly, you were right about that ___ thing," it wouldn't be because I'd done it, but that the speaker had done the changing.

 

[Positron]

"Anti-empirical left", like you Stancil?

Indeed there can't be such a thing as "empirical left": reality is unwoke.

 

[mindlessobserver]

"Anti-empirical left", like you Stancil?

Indeed there can't be such a thing as "empirical left": reality is unwoke.

Leftists believe reality is subjective and can be interpreted. If reality does not track to the interpretation, State power can be used to make it track.

 

[Wallace]

Yes! Yes Will! The algorithm rewards doomscrolling and now everyone is a doomer, and the remedy is to touch grass!







The only thing funnier than watching Bluesky work itself into a pants-shitting frenzy from overdosing on apocalypse porn is how pissy they get when you point out their porn isn't real. They would rather live in a world where everything is awful, neo-nazis roam the streets and slaughter with impunity, and humanity will go extinct in the next year due to climate change, rather than a world where none of those things are happening.
Obviously they're opposed to these things happening, but they are so immensely invested in the seriousness of their porn that deep down, they want that moral high of being able to say "I told you so", like a doomsday prepper.

Progressives would rather live in a world where all of these horrible things they describe are really happening and we are all perpetually minutes away from the inevitable end of the world, just so they can take another hit off of the crack pipe of moral indignation and boast about how much more virtuous, responsible and caring they are then the rest of us alt-right crypto-Nazis. And their master plan for dealing with the coming doom is to build absurd castles in the air or make up windmills to tilt against. Anything to be seen as someone who is Doing Something and Very Serious about this doomed future we are conga-lining towards.

The more one becomes emotionally invested in this narrative, the more difficult it is to realize that it isn't real. Evidence doesn’t mean a thing to a Believer, no matter how fucked up their beliefs are.

 

[mindlessobserver]

Ver archivo adjunto 9064363
Ver archivo adjunto 9064365
Ver archivo adjunto 9064364
Ver archivo adjunto 9064366

Yes! Yes Will! The algorithm rewards doomscrolling and now everyone is a doomer, and the remedy is to touch grass!

Ver archivo adjunto 9064367
Ver archivo adjunto 9064368
Ver archivo adjunto 9064369
Ver archivo adjunto 9064370
Ver archivo adjunto 9064371

The only thing funnier than watching Bluesky work itself into a pants-shitting frenzy from overdosing on apocalypse porn is how pissy they get when you point out their porn isn't real. They would rather live in a world where everything is awful, neo-nazis roam the streets and slaughter with impunity, and humanity will go extinct in the next year due to climate change, rather than a world where none of those things are happening.
Obviously they're opposed to these things happening, but they are so immensely invested in the seriousness of their porn that deep down, they want that moral high of being able to say "I told you so", like a doomsday prepper.

Progressives would rather live in a world where all of these horrible things they describe are really happening and we are all perpetually minutes away from the inevitable end of the world, just so they can take another hit off of the crack pipe of moral indignation and boast about how much more virtuous, responsible and caring they are then the rest of us alt-right crypto-Nazis. And their master plan for dealing with the coming doom is to build absurd castles in the air or make up windmills to tilt against. Anything to be seen as someone who is Doing Something and Very Serious about this doomed future we are conga-lining towards.

The more one becomes emotionally invested in this narrative, the more difficult it is to realize that it isn't real. Evidence doesn’t mean a thing to a Believer, no matter how fucked up their beliefs are.

I think the scary thing is they genuinely believe in their made up reality where Trump is Hitler, trans people are being genocided and we are all going to die of CO2 poisoning tomorrow.

On that particular subject, they unironically believe CO2 is poisonous pollution, and not plant food. Something that is essential for all life on earth.

 

[Nice Stick]

It's the Shepard Tone of doom. It gets worse and worse every day, but never comes to an end or reaches a conclusion. "Someone has got to do something" they scream about problems that don't even exist. Useful idiots I think they are called.

 

[The Ugly One]

Will telling his fellow libtards to stop being hysterical faggots is the best.

 

[AndIMissYou]

0:08

 

[Positron]

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs needs to be supplemented in the age of social media.

In which case Stancil must be so high up that he can say Hello to the International Space Station.

 

[Human Waiter]

Will tweets out his support for trannies in sports. (L)



I'm a bit disappointed that Will isn't crowing more about Platner. (L)


Behold the Liberal mindset, nothing is true or false. (a) (L)

 

[Tactical Wizard]

I'm a bit disappointed that Will isn't crowing more about Platner.

That the nazi tattoo guy is an unstable psychopath? Who could have seen that coming?

 

[An Sionnach Seang]

On that particular subject, they unironically believe CO2 is poisonous pollution, and not plant food. Something that is essential for all life on earth.

they probably got it mixed up with carbon monoxide - along with anything else involving objectivity, chemistry is not these people's strong point, and they probably see it as witchcraft
back to CO2, my high school biology teacher, in about 2000/2001 (when the world was definitely 100% legit going to end in 2006), made an excellent point about this, which I've never even heard discussed since then: if global temperatures increase, this would also increase the rate of photosynthesis, meaning that more CO2 would be consumed by plants and trees, creating a negative feedback loop and putting the brakes on the warming process

 

[I'm a Silly]

they probably got it mixed up with carbon monoxide - along with anything else involving objectivity, chemistry is not these people's strong point, and they probably see it as witchcraft
back to CO2, my high school biology teacher, in about 2000/2001 (when the world was definitely 100% legit going to end in 2006), made an excellent point about this, which I've never even heard discussed since then: if global temperatures increase, this would also increase the rate of photosynthesis, meaning that more CO2 would be consumed by plants and trees, creating a negative feedback loop and putting the brakes on the warming process

I know the MW quote works here, but so does the Upton Sinclair one.

If the climate grift weren't also a method of social control, and merely monetary, these things would still be apt.

 

[Positron]

if global temperatures increase, this would also increase the rate of photosynthesis, meaning that more CO2 would be consumed by plants and trees, creating a negative feedback loop and putting the brakes on the warming process

Off topic but it depends on the type of the plant. The so-called C3 plants (such as rice and wheat) would benefit from the increased CO₂ concentration, but the impact would be minimal for the so-called C4 plants (like maize and sorghum). And the rate of photosynthesis does not increase linearly with temperature; at higher temperature a process called photorespiration (which is basically the reverse of photosynthesis, breaking down glucose to water and carbon dioxide; the energy wasted as heat) sets in (especially with C3) which reduce the efficiency of photosynthesis.

 

[mindlessobserver]

they probably got it mixed up with carbon monoxide - along with anything else involving objectivity, chemistry is not these people's strong point, and they probably see it as witchcraft
back to CO2, my high school biology teacher, in about 2000/2001 (when the world was definitely 100% legit going to end in 2006), made an excellent point about this, which I've never even heard discussed since then: if global temperatures increase, this would also increase the rate of photosynthesis, meaning that more CO2 would be consumed by plants and trees, creating a negative feedback loop and putting the brakes on the warming process

There has actually been an unprecedented global "greening".

https://science.nasa.gov/earth/earth-observatory/global-green-up-slows-warming-146296/

Which should come to the surprise of nobody. Increased CO2 and slightly longer growing seasons have been absolutely great for photosynthesis.

 

[Wallace]

There has actually been an unprecedented global "greening".

Which should come to the surprise of nobody. Increased CO2 and slightly longer growing seasons have been absolutely great for photosynthesis.

Back in the age of dinosaurs, CO2 was at 6,000 parts per million. Today, CO2 is at about 430 ppm. So any hysteria about how more CO2 would make life impossible is just not true. Earth right now is in the midst of a fairly cold phase.

 

[mindlessobserver]

Back in the age of dinosaurs, CO2 was at 6,000 parts per million. Today, CO2 is at about 430 ppm. So any hysteria about how more CO2 would make life impossible is just not true. Earth right now is in the midst of a fairly cold phase.

Thats because we are still coming out of the last ice age. I keep rolling my eyes at the shrieks about glaciers disappearing. Glaciers are rare phenomenon at the geological scale of earth time line. Millions of years have gone by when there was no ice at the poles either.

 

[General Emílio Médici]

CO2 is just the chosen boogeyman because explaining to people how pollution actually works is hard and gets in the way of green grifting. The point was never to help the planet, as you can see from how they refuse to embrace nuclear power or condemn China and India for their pollution. They will literally lie because it is easier to create consensus than to explain the truth to the public.

 

[Miller]

they probably got it mixed up with carbon monoxide - along with anything else involving objectivity, chemistry is not these people's strong point, and they probably see it as witchcraft
back to CO2, my high school biology teacher, in about 2000/2001 (when the world was definitely 100% legit going to end in 2006), made an excellent point about this, which I've never even heard discussed since then: if global temperatures increase, this would also increase the rate of photosynthesis, meaning that more CO2 would be consumed by plants and trees, creating a negative feedback loop and putting the brakes on the warming process

That's why the Climate cultists never bring up the idea of planting more trees. It's not about "saving the planet", it's about control.