Hans Blaster
Hood was a loser.
- Mar 11, 2017
- 21,598
- 16,299
- 55
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
You were given facts so hard to dispute that they aren't "softball" questions, but T-ball* questions. Congratulations on not whiffing on those.Yes as I said I am not disputing those hard facts.
It is not a fact. It has been known since ancient times that some people (not many) have "ambiguous genitalia", what we now call "intersex". There are many causes for this including genetic and physiological causes. All found through the scientific process. Rejecting this empirical research and attacking the science is anti-intellectual.Tell me is it a fact that biological sex is binary being only male and female.
Gender identity gets into a fuzzier world, that of the brain and mind, but there are still empirical techniques and procedures to be used. That research has show that there is some fuzziness to gender (it is not strictly binary) and it is not strictly (though usually) aligned with biological sex. Rejecting the scientific research on gender to maintain an ideological position is an anti-intellectual attack on science.Are there only 2 genders.
It is 100% a fact (and humans have been disturbing the climate and ecosystem for a very long time).What about human caused climate change, to what extent exactly is human made climate change a fact.
I suspect you refer to what has been called "global warming" or "anthropomorphic global warming" driven by increased, human released quantities of carbon dioxide. That is well established as well. That excess CO2 emissions would trigger surface warming has been well understood for 30+ years. That humans are the cause of extra CO2 is even better established than its impact as a surface warmer. The efforts to discredit this empirical science result are politically driven and anti-intellectual.
Evolution is not only the best explanation for the diversity of species, but has been observed in the field and in the lab many times. Natural selection is a well known mechanism that has also been studied extensively. Genetic mutations have been quantified which is how we know that each of us has 50-100 new novel mutations not found in either of our parents. Rejecting evolution for ideological reasons is an anti-intellectual attack on science.What about evolution by natural selection and genetic mutation. Is that a fact for all human change and behaviour.
Despite the obsession with "woke/PC" in science instruction or inclusion in scientific training and employment by you or others, none of these areas of inquiry were created for ideological reasons, nor are the results ideological. Scientific investigation of sex and gender are not some effort by researchers to destroy "traditional sex norms", nor are investigations of climate motivated to destroy "industrial capitalism", nor are investigations of evolution driven to destroy "biblical literalism". No, they are to understand sex/gender outliers in our midst, understand our climate and provide data for policy making, and to understand how biological systems and organisms work and arose.
Attacking science because it provides results that one does not like is anti-intellectualism, plain and simple. No doubt about it. Complaints about the culture of scientists and scientific education with names like "DEI/Woke/PC" is nothing more than an anti-intellectual smokescreen to distract from the direct attacks on the process and results that challenge ones ideological positions.
*T-ball is a version of baseball where the ball is not thrown (or pitched) toward the batter, but instead the stationary ball is placed on stand to be swung at. It is played by small children who don't have the hand-eye coordination to hit a moving target.
Upvote
0