The hypothesis is not "scientists are mostly Republicans." The hypothesis is that reading fiction wires you differently than non-fiction. Scientists read both. Liberal arts majors might read mostly fiction, and would lean Democrat.
-
-
Damn Dilbert Guy, it took you a full day to come up with that response...and it’s still mostly nonsense. Leave it to the literal scientists like myself to handle falsifiable hypotheses, okay?
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
How much fiction do you read? Feels like a lot.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Feels like you're not addressing the flaws in your hypothesis.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Did you do a controlled study to find those flaws or are they...confirmation bias because you were primed by reading a lot of fiction?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I'm just asking questions about how *you* developed this "hypothesis" of yours. What are you basing this on? Or did you just pull it out of your ass? Is it possibly based on your own need to feel that you're smarter than other people?
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Google "hypothesis" and get back to me with why the definition must be wrong because you know it means "based on facts." Go.
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Looks like the non-scientist, fiction-writing creator of a comic strip’s best understanding of what a ‘hypothesis’ is comes from a cursory google search. Yikes, don’t even need to read a lot (non-fiction or otherwise) to tell that Scott’s out of his element
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @DaWooperNation @ScottAdamsSays and
Sounds a lot like what Scott’s doing, doesn’t it?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Take the L.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.