Lucky for you I’m a complete idiot, so I’ll take it 100% on faith.

“Faith” can be any kind of belief system. I know an older man who thought they could make money off the stock market by watching stock prices and by listening to analysts. They’re naive about how things function.

Connected to that is an inability to learn/how to teach themselves by using critical thinking and so heavily rely on other people to spoon feed them information.

Lastly, it’s an identity threat for them when reality doesn’t match their beliefs. So they dig their heels deeper.

(which, reminder, means you should be suspicious of it and the sources. Internet loves to tell you what you want to hear (and what enrages you). Check the source; read the argument; see if you'd find it convincing for a different conclusion.)

The four checkmarks of US school education.

Wow, bad guess! Time to read the article

"smart people don't like me" "I love the poorly educated"

This post is just ONE MORE piece of evidence that shows you are stupid if you vote conservative and arent a member of the 1%.

You morons failed the intelligence test the first time you voted Republican. Ever since Jan 6th, we have watched you and your party CONSTANTLY fail moral tests to reach a point where you guys defend treason and pedophilia now.

So, not only do we have proof that you are stupid. We also know that you are cruel and love to watch those who don't look like you suffer.

You are all despicable and destroyed the country

Someone doesn’t know how science is actually done. It’s a series of surveys over 35 years using sample sizes between 1,500 people and 18,693 individuals, from the limited methodology publications I read through in the last 15 minutes. That’s far more than is required to be considered trustworthy, reliable, and accurate as long as their other methods were sound, which they appear to be.

The study uses binary and ordinal logistic regression models that appear to be highly reliable with large sample sizes, and their accuracy appear reliable based on the study meeting standard core statistical assumptions and they seem to avoid rare-outcome traps.

This is a sound study, and you should probably look into statistical modeling in producing such studies before using language you’ve likely read in comments sections that like to dismiss studies because they don’t like the results or findings for political or personal reasons.

Their methodology:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/downloadSupplement?doi=10.1111%2Fjssr.70101&file=jssr70101-supp-0001-SuppMat.docx

Sounds like someone texted poorly on their cognitive tests

Wait, only 10 questions? Doesn’t sound very reliable to me.

You most certainly do

You're found wanting pretty much across the board