He says that he, personally, changes, aka he's using himself as an example.
Every reader can choose what to do what that, after all, that's what the whole long introduction is about.

If he changes whenever he hears a new opinion, he needs to learn how to think more critically than a 4 year old. Even 5 year old know not to believe everything you hear come out of someone else's mouth.

Guys, we all know that Wally Balls has never changed his opinion about anything in his life. Why are you engaging?

heh. nice comic.

SJWs/leftists never change their opinion. You should only debate an SJW under these circumstances.

1. There is an audience present to witness the SJW get humiliated.

2. You are familiar with the SJWs line of argument and come prepared.

3. The SJW has an open mind and is willing to accept logic. Said SJW has never been discovered but scientists are trying to create one. Results inconclusive.

Edited 5/8/2017 19:41:14

Ah yes, just like your delusions about Dogs being extinct never change.

Good lord that was the greatest statement I've ever read.

Math Wolf I think you posted this about 3 years too late, judging by the comments.


The funniest part of it was that the part of it,that said that it from an evolutionary standpoint made sense, since that part made no sense what so ever


Yeah what was that? They were comparing saying "God is fake" to a religious person to a caveman throwing a rock at your head?

>implying I or anyone else should care Washington had slaves and used their teeth
>a pledge to a (((REPUBLIC))) was not written by a rightwinger
More news: water is wet
>implying it matters WHEN Jesus was born rather than follwing tradition and recognizing he was
>implying Roe v Wade isn't a good thing that has preserved Republican demographic hopes
also >implying Republicans and Democrats are different
>implying that tradition, family, and religion should not be upheld at all costs
>overall implying that people in general should have any political beliefs
>implying it shouldn't just be left to elites and the common people shouldn't just follow tradition
>strawmanning that hard with muh tacos = 4

Wth is this garbage? Muh tolerance, muh let ppl with radically opposite beliefs "debate", lmao slag off.

inb4 some1 tells me I'm just triggered because my core beliefs were challenged by this

Edited 5/9/2017 13:47:08

WallyBalls - he backs up his claimed facts with evidence, which you can check on his site.

The Cruelest - when I first saw this, I was curious about Washington's teeth, so clicked one of the supporting links. As I recall, the evidence is that some of Washington's dentures include human teeth, and there is a ledger entry in Washington's accounts that records paying slaves for teeth.

There is another important aspect: The observed or assumed power of the information givers and with it the potential danger for the individual: Psychology calls it 'perceptional defense'. That means, presented informations are blocked already in the process of perceiving! They do not enter memory.
That makes it easy for governments and media to let us think so easily that, e.g. planes flew into the WTCs or the pentagon or the other historical lies. It would be a real danger for the desired feeling of beeing safe in their lifes! This is, how it works,...too. And the responsible ones know that all. This and more...

no.1 its true: do not mix perception and memory
no.2 yes. e.g.: in one of the videos (from ground) you can see a plane for 1-2secs passing one burning tower. It is not mentioned in the official reports. - A planes nose cannot penetrate a building w/o deformation. - the visible hole in pentagon w/o no destruction next to it cannot be inflicted by a plane.- aso, aso. everybody can see. most do it blindfolded.
The question is: why do you believe their story ...

Edited 5/9/2017 20:01:41

I very much enjoyed the comic, Agreed with the psychology aspects and makes me believe the capacity to change to differentiate the emotional and logical vortex is a valuable one for today's world leaders. I wonderfully wander in thought of the business world and wonder if the very top business leaders have a emotional cortex to one of let's say a employee with a secure job with everything in good order with the free time to perhaps develop ones values hence increasing the emotional cortex. There is a study according to a source of a friend that says most of the world's Business leaders are psychopathic meaning no emotional cortex. Would they be more willing to change? By theory yes!

Wandering through the comments here ,

Interestingly , I've never felt a huge variation of Cognitive Disconnance on a political issues where new information was revealed. I rather think logically them emotionally , Probably the opposite when I lead Outlaws but whatever :)

I think in a world that's technologically advancing at rates which are crazy with the even more influx of education , I believe people are changing from being a conservative to being more let's say "changeable". Politically the systems or mechanisms in place have to change to meet the needs of the population. Issues such as abortion , death penalty and belief in God are statistically changing. Changing will always happen in a society , It's about making the logically viable choices to keep up with societal changes that matter.

Edited 5/9/2017 20:53:37

This was great! :)

God I hate the oatmeal (the maker of this comic). he might be right in this instance,but his stuff is 9 times out of 10 trash. Nazis gonna Nazi, Commies gonna commie, muzzies gonna muz, libtards gonna lib, and the rest of us just kinda have to do our best to deal with it and live our lives

God I hate the oatmeal (the maker of this comic). he might be right in this instance,but his stuff is 9 times out of 10 trash.

Although formulated in a rather negative way, I do think this brings up a valid point.

It's often very difficult to distinguish between the messenger and the message. When you know that the messenger has certain tendencies or leaning, it's difficult not to view the message in that light.

In politics: nobody will take Trump seriously if he would suddenly say: "Immigrants are amazing, we should welcome them with open arms" and neither would anyone believe Elizabeth Warren if she were to say: "I think the rich should pay less taxes and we can easily save that money by putting a stop on abortion funding."

Nevertheless, people from opposing ideologies may sometimes have ideas that are perfectly acceptable even for their biggest criticasters. But the messenger itself may already cause a backfire effect and the idea that an opponent might have something useful to say may by itself already be cause for cognitive dissonance.

EDIT: fixed some minor spelling and grammar mistakes.

Edited 5/10/2017 12:27:58

The guy who made the comic makes comics of cats

Such a beautiful thread <3

AKA genetic fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy

OT is really, really bad at that. this thread for example, if i had posted the exact same thing it would simply have drawn insults and it would already been hidden.

Yeah, well, that's the thing. You wouldn't have posted something like this.

This comic does not advocate critical thinking. It advocates listening to opposing opinions and then accepting them as facts.