Posit: if you believe in a hoax despite lack of evidence, you are less likely to believe in something supported by overwhelming evidence.
-
e.g. if you believe in chemtrails, you are less likely to believe in climate change. The latent variable being a lack of critical thinking.
Case in point: HN's gwern publicly supported the hoax about CW being Satoshi. But when the real one was revealed with overwhelming evidence,
-
-
gwern was the conspiracy theorist attacking the evidence with very weak arguments. Ironic!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.