Who Would Have Ever Suspected?

This, from Crooks and Liars today:

"A study at University College London in the UK has found that conservatives' brains have larger amygdalas than the brains of liberals. Amygdalas are responsible for fear and other "primitive" emotions. At the same time, conservatives' brains were also found to have a smaller anterior cingulate -- the part of the brain responsible for courage and optimism."

No comment needed.

Comments

Cardinal44 said…
I'm surprised they could measure brains that small.
December 29, 2010 at 6:01 PM
magpie said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
December 30, 2010 at 2:10 AM
magpie said…
It's probably garbage though. How big was the test group?

I had a parallel 'discussion' over at my site with a conservative who was carrying on about a "liberal gene".

If we proceed from some assumption that conservatives vote conservative because of biology rather than being brainwashed, lied to, manipulated or just a being a jerk then there's not much we can hope for.

It's also similar to the kind of 'science' filth like Stormfront like to puke into the Internet. We don't want to sound like them.

However... the neurologist in the article does say it's not clear whether the brain differences come before the political views or visa versa... potentially meaning that thinking like a conservative is brain-damaging.
December 30, 2010 at 2:11 AM
magpie said…
Answering my own question:
The study was carried out on 90 students.
December 30, 2010 at 2:23 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

It's Okay, Never Mind

Image
The woman in this picture, equipped with the weapons and ammunition shown, was found outside a National guard base. She is apparently a big Glenn Beck fan, and believed that the base was a FEMA concentration camp. Think she's the only one out there? You just know this sort of thing is not going to end well.
Read more

If a Tree Falls In the Woods

Image
 And nobody hears it, is it really running for President at all? First of all, a note about my absence lately:  My wife got me to sign up for an account at Threads, which is sort of like X without the assholes.  I've spent a little time establishing myself there, and I have to say, I do like the relatively immediate exchange of views, but I don't mean to give up my blog- there are still so many things that can't be dealt with in a couple hundred words, so, perhaps to your dismay, I am back. So, what motivated the above question is the fact that the Sunday New York Times today had seven articles about Trump, and absolutely zero about Kamala Harris.   The Republicans have a problem with Harris, in that virtually everyone who sees her likes her and immediately understands how qualified she is to be President.  They have tried mightily the last month to find some way to smear her, but have been spectacularly unsuccessful- the tactics of character assassination ...
Read more

Wingnuts Slightly Annoyed about that $83 Million

Image
How can you look like a decrepit old geezer and an out of control two year old at the same time? I thought it might be nice to look in on wingnut world to see how they are taking yesterday's $83 million dollar Trump legal loss.  You kind of know that they will decide it shouldn't affect their opinion of him in any way, but it might be helpful to see just how the Republican party has trained them to reject any fact they don't like.  Not that surprisingly, a lot of the usual wingnut suspects didn't touch this loss at all, preferring to just ignore anything that interferes with their hateful daydreams, but here are a few excerpts from an article at Gateway Pundit, along with a sample of the hundreds of comments it received.  Enjoy.  Or not. "Trump attorney Alina Habba WENT OFF after the crooked New York City court slapped President Trump with an $83 million judgment for speaking out against the disgusting lies of a crazed woman who said he lured her into a Bergdorf Go...
Read more