• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    611 year ago

    *every known letter of the alphabet.

    The implication that there are undiscovered letters creates excitement for the reader. Who knows what is out there!

  • Th4tGuyII
    link
    fedilink
    841 year ago

    Starts to make sense how some conspiracies come out when you get examples like this of people being blatantly ignorant of evidence right in front of their noses

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21 year ago

      In my experience it has less to do with stuff like this where people are just not looking close enough or are mistaken and more to do with the idea of them being wrong being impossible. Conspiracies that I interact with don’t even discuss evidence. Because they can’t be wrong and there’s no way to falsify their worldview.

      • AlexisFR
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        This, in the post truth era, evidence is only useful to educated people that are willing. For most victims, we have to de program them first.

        • Tar_Alcaran
          link
          fedilink
          English
          31 year ago

          Every single discussion I have about climate ends with “yes, that’s one side of the argument, but who really knows what’s the truth”.

          Motherfucker, you said something that’s false. I showed you you were wrong by a factor of several million. Where ever the exact truth lies, it’s way on the other side of the fucking moon from your standpoint.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        A lot of it has to do with wanting to be superior. They have feelings of not having control so they tell themselves and each other that everyone else is stupid and being fooled but not them, they are the smart few, they know the truth, they are the in crowd.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    10
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I especially like when the person who says “theres[sic] no letter e” is wrong 3 times and makes a spelling mistake. 😂

    Absolute disasterclass.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    201 year ago

    the availability of text on the internet can make people believe they’re an expert on topics that take a lifetime to understand

    if people should do their own research, we may as well shutter the national labs and universities

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      201 year ago

      we may as well shutter the national labs and universities

      That’s an extremely desirable outcome for the “do your own research” crowd.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This is actually a perfect representation of the shallow “research” conspiracy theorists do.

    Quoting only the first few lines of an abstract outlining a problem/open question then ignoring the rest of the paper where they address the issue in the abstract.

    This way, they can claim that the paper says the exact opposite of what it does.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Just look at those viral math problems. I recently saw one that was something like (1+2*3)*(1*0) and most comments were arguing if it was 7 or 9

      • glibg10b
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        I think you mean (1+2*3)*(1*0).

        Escape your asterisks, kids.

          • glibg10b
            link
            fedilink
            English
            21 year ago

            It does if you forgot everything you learned in school

              • glibg10b
                link
                fedilink
                English
                11 year ago

                And I agree. You’re completely missing my point, though

                The only advice I can give is to re-read the thread, starting from @[email protected]’s comment. If the source of your confusion is that you don’t know what escaping the asterisks means, then just ask

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 year ago

      Of course, there’s also the times where we just make the research hard to do.

      Like, we teach kids PEMDAS, but then don’t actually follow PEMDAS in the original textbooks that introduce it and definitely not in common math or physics texts.

      Like, you’ll see 1/2√r in Feynman’s lectures being written not to represent ½√r = √r / 2 as pemdas would suggest, but 1/(2√r).

      Similarly, the original textbooks that introduced PEMDAS, if you read them, actually followed what you might call PEJMDAS, where multiplication via juxtaposition is treated as binding tighter than explicit multiplication, so 1÷2(2+3) would be interpreted not as ½(5) but as 1 ÷ (2 * 5), but they considered that so obvious they didn’t bother to explicitly spell it out in the rules.

      And now we have Facebook memes and tiktok livestreams arguing about what 1÷2(2+3) actually means.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        Also by the time you’ve learned order of operations, you’ve outgrown the ÷ operator. You would never write 1 ÷ (2 * 5), you would write it with a proper numerator and denominator like anyone outside of elementary school would.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          I hate these math problems you see on social media. No one would write that way or code that way. It is ambiguous, and even if it weren’t it is still hard to figure out. I think in my entire career I have seen one single line of code that took PEMDAS to sort out, I remember that line and the programmer told me that they were exploiting a feature of the complier to get slightly faster results. He was an annoying person

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    24
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    W is in brown

    E is in over

    V is in over

    Z is in lazy

    K is in quick

    And I can’t endorse any viewpoint that tells me to accept something on faith. You might not have time to do your own research on every single issue but you are certainly welcome too

    • FauxPseudo OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      221 year ago

      This isn’t about not doing your research. It’s a lesson in the pitfalls of thinking you’ve competently done your research…

        • Simple Jack
          link
          fedilink
          English
          41 year ago

          I didn’t look at the picture or read any other comments, so I am going to say ‘yes’. Or ‘no’. I’m going to need coffee first and that usually ends up with me forgetting this post by the time I get back.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      Should say to have your research peer reviewed

      They did it and were wrong but now they can be corrected