Social compliance explained. This is why so many got vaxxed without as much as a second thought. pic.twitter.com/OwJnrM3lIi

— THE FLAT EARTHER (@TheFlatEartherr) February 1, 2024

This behavior could help us understand what happened during Covid, or the alphabet movement, or how our political parties differ.

I wonder what the backgrounds were.

The woman who "failed" looked like she was likely the most content with her person. Likely a large correlation between a person's self confidence and playing socially perceived games.

9.9 out of 10 people are followers. it's not their fault per say it's just easier to go along to get along in many cases. we are also programmed as a society to spurn that leadership beauvoir in some ways over the last 25 to 30 years because our own govt believes the greater threat to their own existence are its free citizens. which means lack of critical thinking skills.

the best advice i could give anyone is question everything trust nothing always verify. and believe in yourself have confidence to stand up against the wave of humanity. the masses are almost always wrong because they are being led astray.

texagbeliever said:

---

I wonder what the backgrounds were.

The woman who "failed" looked like she was likely the most content with her person. Likely a large correlation between a person's self confidence and playing socially perceived games.

---

Hope at least Amy got to sit in the booth after her removal and watch the lemmings

texagbeliever said:

---

I wonder what the backgrounds were.

The woman who "failed" looked like she was likely the most content with her person. Likely a large correlation between a person's self confidence and playing socially perceived games.

---

I took it that way as well. When she was escorted out I immediately thought of the vax v unvax scenario from a few years ago. I saw her as vaccinated.

Careful, now - I recently caught a 3 day ban for recalling unflattering behaviors which said poster had bragged about.

eta: the cited "offense" was trolling, while the intent was to present the context of that poster's broader judgement (as would color the topical opinions).

Elevator experiment shows the same thing.

I don't know if this is the same thing as people blindly getting the vax. This was an interview situation with zero context. The vax on the other hand was something people were able to research. No doubt there was alot of followers but those followers were far dumber than the people in this crowd who had no idea what was going on.

Urban Ag said:

---

There was a thread a few days ago about some study on lab rats (I think) that showed longer term health problems from the Covid vax.

A certain poster picked apart the article linked and posted the laugh/cry emoji when quoting that the researcher admitted that long term clinical studies would still be needed.

I responded that you took the vax without any long term clinical studies. Do you find that as (laugh/cry emoji) amusing as well?

I never got a response.

---

Yes, but choosing to put things in our bodies on a daily basis that has had little or poor studies is as American as apple pie,

Sure, some will say I don't ingest any many made chemicals. That may be true for a small small number of people, but even then they actual do without knowing it.

People never question those things in the supermarket and hold off on some new product until more studies are done. But for some reason, trusting the medical community is all of a sudden the most illogical thing to do.

I get the flu shot every year and don't ask whats in it. And its not the same every year either.

What bothers me is that people were forced to get the shot. People aren't forced to ingest harmful chemicals...they do it of their own volition, but usually because they don't know better.

There's a few things with this that I have a problem with.

First, the voice-over said that these people were applicants. I assume that means that they were trying to get a job or position. That means the applicants are trying to convince somebody that they are a good pick for the position. There is a perceived possible reward for the applicant to show the interviewer that they will go along to fit in with the group. So there is a reason for the applicants to follow along with the up/down stuff.

You also see some of the applicants laughing at the end. They know it's dumb but they are having some fun doing it. Maybe because it will be a great story to tell their friends later.

The writing says that the applicants would stand and sit without any instructions but we all observe what other people do to figure out how to get the social environment to work like we want. Things like filling out an order form at the deli counter instead of just talking to the deli guy at my local grocery store. I was never told it but I saw other people do it and asked one of them if it was the local way of getting my sandwich meat sliced. A typical 'go along to get along' situation that is being done here with the bell up/down stupidity.

I am surprised that none of the applicants seemed to ask what the bell and up/down stuff was about. Maybe they cut that out of the video.

About Amy. The two dudes who came in before her learned that not doing the up/down stupidity leads to removal from the application process. In other words, losing. People don't like to lose. If the first two were having any thoughts of following Amy, her getting the boot taught them that following her would lead to losing.

I assume (hope) that there were other people like Amy who got booted from the game. Them getting booted would have taught the previous applicants the same lesson.

I would love to know how many people got booted and their sexes. I was surprised to see that there was only one woman at the end of the game because in my experience women are much more likely to go along with instructions that have no logical reasoning than men.

It would have been cool (and sad) to see if the experimenters could introduce another nonsensical action to the group. Just before they remove the actors, play a different sound and have the actors do something more strange that standing up/sitting down. Something like walking across the floor to touch a wall and returning to their chair. How long would it take the applicants to adopt that behavior?

And just because I'm mean, then the experimenters should take the actors out and play a third sound to see if the applicants develop a behavior on their own.

And this, boys and girls, is why there are rules about experimenting on humans.

Also, nobody seemed to have phones.

I'll bet the experimenters made the applicants leave them outside of the room.

If the applicants had phones I'd guarantee that there would be much fewer up/down compliant applicants. Of course that would be because the non-compliant applicants would be face down in their phones for that sweet social media dopamine hit.

Lots of similar studies on this type of lemming behavior.

One notable study showed people will answer questions incorrectly, knowing full well they are wrong, to agree with a group. Individual without others, correct answer rate was like 99%. They added, 1, then 2, then 3 people who answered wrongly. By the time 3 actors answered incorrectly, the study subjects just repeated the incorrect answers at a rate of like 75%. But the individual setting showed people pretty much would never answer that way, or come to that conclusion, without the influence of the actors around them. But when other people answered wrong, they also answered wrong to align with the group.

On some level it's an instinctual survival strategy.

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Social compliance explained. This is why so many got vaxxed without as much as a second thought. pic.twitter.com/OwJnrM3lIi

— THE FLAT EARTHER (@TheFlatEartherr) February 1, 2024

This behavior could help us understand what happened during Covid, or the alphabet movement, or how our political parties differ.

---

Welcome to the liberal "hive" mind. Those that do not comply or question are removed.

This is why conservatives are so hated by the left for conservatives believe in individualism and freedom.

As for me, I would have been removed for getting up and down on the sound of a ring would have started me laughing at them.

AGinHI said:

---

Me:

---

This was the actual test and not the exam.

Urban Ag said:

---

There was a thread a few days ago about some study on lab rats (I think) that showed longer term health problems from the Covid vax.

A certain poster picked apart the article linked and posted the laugh/cry emoji when quoting that the researcher admitted that long term clinical studies would still be needed.

I responded that you took the vax without any long term clinical studies. Do you find that as (laugh/cry emoji) amusing as well?

I never got a response.

---

Ever hear back?

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Social compliance explained. This is why so many got vaxxed without as much as a second thought. pic.twitter.com/OwJnrM3lIi

— THE FLAT EARTHER (@TheFlatEartherr) February 1, 2024

This behavior could help us understand what happened during Covid, or the alphabet movement, or how our political parties differ.

---

Amy was the only critical thinker in the group. 1 out of 11 (including the 4 actors).

Peer pressure is something to behold.

It takes a really strong individual to resist.

I was on nextdoor during the COVID thing and endured much scorn and abuse because of my counter views on the masks and lockdowns.

My first thought would be to assume the first three received additional instructions while the other applicants were out of the room.

It stands to reason that they were instructed to do so by the people conducting the interview, absent more information, as there is no other reason that fits the context. Therefore, I don't think it's a case of blind following so much as making logical inferences. I would still ask one of the others for clarification though.

The last statement in the video isn't really accurate. Nobody "told" them to do it.

However, the one person that didn't do it was removed. That was noticed.

Sea Speed said:

---

Elevator experiment shows the same thing.

---

I just assumed someone farted.

Urban Ag said:

---

There was a thread a few days ago about some study on lab rats (I think) that showed longer term health problems from the Covid vax.

A certain poster picked apart the article linked and posted the laugh/cry emoji when quoting that the researcher admitted that long term clinical studies would still be needed.

I responded that you took the vax without any long term clinical studies. Do you find that as (laugh/cry emoji) amusing as well?

I never got a response.

---

More studies are ALWAYS needed. It says so in every study.

I'm also reminded of this gem

SpreadsheetAg said:

---

I'm also reminded of this gem

---

Notice how they all claim IQ tests are either flawed or don't accurately measure intelligence, except for the white guy.

They do measure intelligence and that's why the left is working hard to get rid of SAT scores for admittance. SAT scores correlate closely with IQ. You can't increase intelligence/intellectual ability. Knowledge yes, but not intelligence.

We are headed for woke Idiocracy.

I see 5 main aspects to intelligence:
1. Problem solving
2. Memory recall
3. Emotional intelligence
4. Independence of thought (Amy in OP)
5. Awareness of what you don't know

An IQ test only covers 1&2 so it is limited.
I'd guess that Tyler would rank the highest for 4 which can manifest itself as higher intelligence.

IQ tests are heavily normed going back decades. So the average is 100 and that's the average across the population as a whole. It's pretty much true that half the population will always be below average IQ.