I've noticed a trend on CC (and, of course in "real" life, such as it is) where people insist that despite documented evidence that is completely contrary to their stated opinion, the evidence is meaningless and somehow doesn't apply to them.
On CC, it seems to haunt the chance threads where people insist that they, or the OP in the thread, have near certain acceptance to (pick one) Harvard, Stanford, Yale or (any other random top 100 school) despite CDS numbers that indicate <1% of enrolled students have stats as low as theirs. Usually they attribute it to a peculiar definition of "holistic" admissions that they believe guarantees every unique snowflake a free pass from the reality of GPA, standardized test scores, recommendations, essays and EC's.
Next there are those who insist their opinions are the absolute, total truth, because "an admissions officer" told them, and any evidence on the college website to the contrary is totally false.
Lastly, there are the overly entitled prep school bunch who think just because the school sends XX% to IVY, they will be the lucky one who not only gets in, but gets in to thier first choice despite a) lackluster grades and standardized test scores; b) not being a legacy (unlike most of the admits to Ivy's from their prep) and c) not having immensely rich parents (who make up most of the IVY admits from their prep with less than stellar grades),
OK, vent over. thanks for reading!