Hahahahaha oh my god Psychology Today has done a numbet on you, what a moron, the first study has N=15, it’s entirely based on self-diagnosis and surveys. The want to come up with a neurological basis for it based off fifteen people self-reporting fuck off lmfao
Can’t wait to see the second one.
This is like when my sister decided she was a super taster and that cilantro tastes like soap.
I never said I was particularly impressed with the rigor of ALL NEUROSCIENTISTS, they are as bad as physicists involved with string theory. Unfalsifiable nonsense. This is the kind of shit I’m talking about when I trash the entire field of “smart science” that’s been picked up by TPOT and Lesswrong and other pseuds.
saw it debunked
Oh you want me to prove aphantasia isn’t real lol, no wonder you have trouble with things like this where people play word games, you’re completely devoid of logic. The onus is on you, and neuroscientists, to prove it exists.
What you did is go pull every paper you could possibly find which reinforces your identity.
Buddy you’re coping so hard. You said you saw a reliable source debunk aphantasia, and now you’ve been caught in your lie and you’re trying to weasel your way out. Some of these papers also have pools of various phantasiaca in the hubdreds to thousands. A few of the sources clearly state (and give a source for) tens of thousands of people having been diagnosed with aphantasia.
Where is this “debunking” you said you saw? Is your angle now just “scientists are wrong and bad and having actual evidence on different levels of mental visual imagery is fake news, even though I am saying it’s wrong with no knowledge of neuroscience or psychology at all”?
Many people are diagnosed with “ADHD” too idiot, it’s just a sleep disruption disorder.
I’m talking about meta analysis of studies on people with aphantasia, because studies are all like the crap you just posted. People don’t just slurp up every study they can find on Google you fucking idiot…
Did you think I meant “Mythbusters” style takedown? I bet you want a youtube video. You could cure your “aphantasia” by reading books before bed instead of using the computer, but you won’t.
That’s what I mean psychology is such a clown shoes “science”.
You’d rather stay up late reading this shit than actually try to improve your health. It’s a disease a lot like ADHD.
Ah so now you’re just going on a tangent in a desperate attempt to drive the conversation away from where you’ve been established to be wrong according to an ocean of credible researchers on the subject.
Many people are diagnosed with “ADHD” too idiot, it’s just a sleep disruption disorder.
Oh my God this cannot be real. Now you can find a thousand papers with a sample size you’ll like which very much establish your view as idiotic. But let me guess, the scientists are wrong and you’re right despite not being a medical researcher or even a medical professional at all? What authority do you think you have on this?
The fact is that the burden of proof is on you considering you’re arguing against established psychology/neuroscience research in the field that has had qualified researchers agreeing to the existence of. You can not just pull “science is wrong” out of your ass.
You are a bad liar. You have no evidence to your claims and the entire argument you make is “just trust me bro, even if the scientific community disagrees with me and I can’t find a source for my incorrect claims I still totally am right”.
You’re grandstanding, but I’m just trying to get through what I mean to you. There’s no point in deliberately misinterpreting it lol.
An ocean of “credible researchers” gave us “adhd” a disorder where kids who don’t sleep enough get treated with amphetamines, yes. It’s not a tangent, it’s a direct comparison to a huge scandal taking place in psychology psychiatry and neuroscience. They have no responsibility to isolate whatever they study from environmental causes. So they just end up looking for genetic associations where there are none. Don’t sleep enough, it gets harder to FOCUS, not only on schoolwork, but your imagination itself. Are you starting to “get the picture”? 😁
There is no way you’re actually being real at this point. Do you have any qualifications in medical research (if so state the qualifications), and have you ever written a paper studying neuroscience or even had higher education on the matter? Do you think you are more credible on the matter than ADHD&Autism experts and specialists in mental imagery? Don’t flood your comment with other bullshit noise, just answer those two questions.
Here, I’ll stop being a cunt if you humor this example:
Histrionic personality disorder “isn’t real” and was “never fuckin real” by my definitions. Were there people who fit the description? Yes. But it’s not a rigorous definition of what’s happening. I don’t think these studies do a good job of showing it’s not metacognition, environmental, or behavioral factors wrapped up into a buzzword. I will respect your wall of links by pulling some examples from them rather than just complaining about the small sample size or where the sample was taken.
“By my definitions” is the problem. You have 0 qualification or education on the matter so you don’t get to change definitions. You have no say in what medical conditions are.
You don’t have any of those things either, you just blindly trust in whatever is coming out of psychology journals. That’s the opposite of what someone performing a critical meta-analysis of “aphantasia” or “adhd” or autism studies would do.
You’re clearly not a very logical person, I was referencing the existence of this kind of data you presented me with from the very start. ADHD has also been pretty thoroughly debunked
But clearly the many, many researchers on the subject do and they pretty much all blatantly accept that aphantasia is very real. This is the consensus between pretty much all of the modern research on the subject.
you just blindly trust in whatever is coming out of psychology journals.
Brother I have linked you multiple studies, one with a sample size in the thousands.
That’s the opposite of what someone performing a critical meta-analysis of “aphantasia” or “adhd” or autism studies would do.
I linked multiple meta-analyses and the researchers all have multiple papers where they affirm the existence of aphantasia. Neither of us are qualified to say the scientific community is wrong on science.
You’re clearly not a very logical person,
I am the only one with real data. You are just saying “that data isn’t good enough!” while having no data of your own.
It’s funny thinking about you hopping mad screaming SIRI SEARCH GOOGLE FOR ADHD STUDIES, yeah like I said dude, people believed histrionic personality disorder was real but it turns out it was environmental, behavioral, cultural especially.
Before it was women who couldn’t meet expectations.
Aphantasia is a level lower, perfect for our hyper-individualistic age, it has no consequences at all for people, other than annoyingly inserting into conversation that they can’t visualize things but can still imagine them. Or at least sometimes, like you talked about your memories being fuzzier than you want.
Hahahahaha oh my god Psychology Today has done a numbet on you, what a moron, the first study has N=15, it’s entirely based on self-diagnosis and surveys. The want to come up with a neurological basis for it based off fifteen people self-reporting fuck off lmfao
Can’t wait to see the second one.
This is like when my sister decided she was a super taster and that cilantro tastes like soap.
I never said I was particularly impressed with the rigor of ALL NEUROSCIENTISTS, they are as bad as physicists involved with string theory. Unfalsifiable nonsense. This is the kind of shit I’m talking about when I trash the entire field of “smart science” that’s been picked up by TPOT and Lesswrong and other pseuds.
Oh you want me to prove aphantasia isn’t real lol, no wonder you have trouble with things like this where people play word games, you’re completely devoid of logic. The onus is on you, and neuroscientists, to prove it exists.
What you did is go pull every paper you could possibly find which reinforces your identity.
Buddy you’re coping so hard. You said you saw a reliable source debunk aphantasia, and now you’ve been caught in your lie and you’re trying to weasel your way out. Some of these papers also have pools of various phantasiaca in the hubdreds to thousands. A few of the sources clearly state (and give a source for) tens of thousands of people having been diagnosed with aphantasia.
Where is this “debunking” you said you saw? Is your angle now just “scientists are wrong and bad and having actual evidence on different levels of mental visual imagery is fake news, even though I am saying it’s wrong with no knowledge of neuroscience or psychology at all”?
Many people are diagnosed with “ADHD” too idiot, it’s just a sleep disruption disorder. I’m talking about meta analysis of studies on people with aphantasia, because studies are all like the crap you just posted. People don’t just slurp up every study they can find on Google you fucking idiot… Did you think I meant “Mythbusters” style takedown? I bet you want a youtube video. You could cure your “aphantasia” by reading books before bed instead of using the computer, but you won’t. That’s what I mean psychology is such a clown shoes “science”. You’d rather stay up late reading this shit than actually try to improve your health. It’s a disease a lot like ADHD.
Ah so now you’re just going on a tangent in a desperate attempt to drive the conversation away from where you’ve been established to be wrong according to an ocean of credible researchers on the subject.
Oh my God this cannot be real. Now you can find a thousand papers with a sample size you’ll like which very much establish your view as idiotic. But let me guess, the scientists are wrong and you’re right despite not being a medical researcher or even a medical professional at all? What authority do you think you have on this?
The fact is that the burden of proof is on you considering you’re arguing against established psychology/neuroscience research in the field that has had qualified researchers agreeing to the existence of. You can not just pull “science is wrong” out of your ass.
You are a bad liar. You have no evidence to your claims and the entire argument you make is “just trust me bro, even if the scientific community disagrees with me and I can’t find a source for my incorrect claims I still totally am right”.
You’re grandstanding, but I’m just trying to get through what I mean to you. There’s no point in deliberately misinterpreting it lol.
An ocean of “credible researchers” gave us “adhd” a disorder where kids who don’t sleep enough get treated with amphetamines, yes. It’s not a tangent, it’s a direct comparison to a huge scandal taking place in psychology psychiatry and neuroscience. They have no responsibility to isolate whatever they study from environmental causes. So they just end up looking for genetic associations where there are none. Don’t sleep enough, it gets harder to FOCUS, not only on schoolwork, but your imagination itself. Are you starting to “get the picture”? 😁
There is no way you’re actually being real at this point. Do you have any qualifications in medical research (if so state the qualifications), and have you ever written a paper studying neuroscience or even had higher education on the matter? Do you think you are more credible on the matter than ADHD&Autism experts and specialists in mental imagery? Don’t flood your comment with other bullshit noise, just answer those two questions.
Here, I’ll stop being a cunt if you humor this example:
Histrionic personality disorder “isn’t real” and was “never fuckin real” by my definitions. Were there people who fit the description? Yes. But it’s not a rigorous definition of what’s happening. I don’t think these studies do a good job of showing it’s not metacognition, environmental, or behavioral factors wrapped up into a buzzword. I will respect your wall of links by pulling some examples from them rather than just complaining about the small sample size or where the sample was taken.
“By my definitions” is the problem. You have 0 qualification or education on the matter so you don’t get to change definitions. You have no say in what medical conditions are.
Maybe you should check on how many people are getting diagnosed with histrionic personality disorder then, grandpa 😂 it’s 2024
You don’t have any of those things either, you just blindly trust in whatever is coming out of psychology journals. That’s the opposite of what someone performing a critical meta-analysis of “aphantasia” or “adhd” or autism studies would do.
You’re clearly not a very logical person, I was referencing the existence of this kind of data you presented me with from the very start. ADHD has also been pretty thoroughly debunked
But clearly the many, many researchers on the subject do and they pretty much all blatantly accept that aphantasia is very real. This is the consensus between pretty much all of the modern research on the subject.
Brother I have linked you multiple studies, one with a sample size in the thousands.
I linked multiple meta-analyses and the researchers all have multiple papers where they affirm the existence of aphantasia. Neither of us are qualified to say the scientific community is wrong on science.
I am the only one with real data. You are just saying “that data isn’t good enough!” while having no data of your own.
Lmao complete bullshit. “It’s been debunked!!!” yet you can provide zero actual evidence. Here’s an analysis of ADHD research, another one, here’s one on the effectiveness of treating ADHD, here’s another one. Tell a neuroscience researcher “ADHD doesn’t exist” and you’ll be laughed at, much of the data is extremely high quality with large sample sizes (there’s even research with tens of thousands of participants).
It’s funny thinking about you hopping mad screaming SIRI SEARCH GOOGLE FOR ADHD STUDIES, yeah like I said dude, people believed histrionic personality disorder was real but it turns out it was environmental, behavioral, cultural especially. Before it was women who couldn’t meet expectations.
Aphantasia is a level lower, perfect for our hyper-individualistic age, it has no consequences at all for people, other than annoyingly inserting into conversation that they can’t visualize things but can still imagine them. Or at least sometimes, like you talked about your memories being fuzzier than you want.