Facts don't care about you and your feelings - A fact is the reality! You can ignore that, but the reality will not go away!

Exactly, what at the end we get is 🍑 = 💩

All people born ignorant, but people can stop to be ignorant!
https://t.me/FactsReality/6
https://t.me/FactsReality/7
https://t.me/StopDieWelle
https://t.me/IgnorancePeople
https://t.me/PalestineIgnorance

It's up to you which ticket you will buy, happy end with bullshit informations just to make you happy or real infos verified and shared to you, that maybe is not really what you wish to hear.

One thing is sure. If you buy the ticket "a reassuring lie" and you believe such bullshit, well you are a 🐑!

Next time buy the ticket for
https://t.me/StopDieWelle/81

Remember, a TelegramFreaks with such symptoms is not a True TelegramFreaks, but just like all sheep TelegramFreaks! Never be a sheep! #StopDieWelle Act rationally, don't follow the mass of people like chickens
@DieWelleTelegram

Why people don't change mind in front of facts - part 2

Part 1: https://t.me/IsraelWarBullshit/952

The human mind is a social mind, and we live in a community of knowledge in which we depend upon one another to think effectively to support complex and productive action (Sloman and Fernbach, 2018).

The human mind is a social mind that is embedded in social, cultural, and ecological contexts, and as such is wired to act in accordance, rather than in con ict, with social cues and values in one's environ (Schill et al., 2019).

Recent research in social network analysis has found that while novel ideas that are disseminated across large, unstructured networks (e.g. Twitter) may spread more quickly, such information ows rarely result in widespread behavior change (Centola, 2021). Rather, this research suggests that change starts and spreads in the peripheries of societies, where new ideas take hold among smaller social networks by means of strong social ties, which then connect to other social networks, and then eventually they are adopted by the centers (Centola, 2018, 2021).

In this sense, social networks are key both for openness to change as well as resistance to it.

———

Have we said some bullshit? No problem, you can tell us, for example in the comment, and we have no problem to recheck that and in case say "we said bullshit" ... since we don't believe anything, even things said by scientists, and maybe such scientists said bullshit ...

We have not checked every single sources cited, like we did with a nutrition paper
https://t.me/GenRevolutionOfficial/182

It's not the scope! Like said, we NEVER visited Israel / Palestine too ...
We have no problem to say that.
https://t.me/IsraelWarBullshit/713

This instead is not be done be most people ... that prefer to defend bullshit, even if they discover it's a bullshit.

Best example? We discovered only after a while this video is bullshit https://t.me/IsraelTelegramChannels/10 but we have no problem to say we did an error
https://t.me/IsraelWarBullshit/87

Why people don't change mind in front of facts - part 1

Well the fact is THAT BOTH ARE AGGRESSIVE, instead of thinking with the brain.

Means even Israel, just think this example, but there are many more https://t.me/IsraelWarBullshit/579

It's pretty ridiculous that in 2023 PEOPLE ARE NOT ABLE TO REFLECT ON INFORMATIONS THEY GET OR TO TALK ABOUT ... they need to fight directly. At least Ben did it better in this scene https://t.me/IsraelWarBullshit/753 but such things are not done by many people

They have their ideas and they continue to keep such ideas, because reflecting and maybe changing mind is to difficult. Obviously this doesn't happen only with the war, but all things. Just think how many people are still using WhatsApp, even if Telegram is offering more and all things are better. Once people fell "this is perfect" it's difficult to put such people away from their idea "this is perfect", even if in reality "this is not perfect" ...

Conclusion (from a research done in 2023): This article (post) may not change your mind
As argued above, decades of research in multiple elds have demonstrated the limited effectiveness of scientific evidence for shifting social norms, creating uptake of new behaviors, or even generating effective solutions.

Most attitudes and behaviors regarding conservation decision-making are not based on the rational evaluation of evidence, but determined instead by a host of contextual, social, and cultural factors and values. Therefore, providing additional information – even in accessible formats - is not likely to lead to significant changes.

Similarly, it is questionable whether an evidence-based article such as this one will serve to change minds, as accepting the claims above may challenge one's prior beliefs about science communication, and perhaps even one's sense of how the world works. Attitudes and beliefs are highly resistant to change, and scientists are as prone as anyone else to “seeing what we believe” (Gorman and Gorman, 2016).