• Carnelian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    It’s comedic actually, your “literally all of biology” is exposed as being an indefensible fringe whack job, and you hand wave it away without further comment. I guess this was always the road you were destined to take, as with all pseudo-intellectual hucksters who are incapable of providing receipts

    As for your continued inflexible adamance that there are perfectly binary biological absolutes, you are almost too dense to believe lol. They even have a graph that explains it for you. I can appreciate the low effort nature of how you are trying to save face with ctrl+f, but at some point scientific integrity demands you actually sit down to understand a topic, rather than just draw transphobic constellations over individual sentences

    Since we are apparently moving now to our closing arguments by addressing our readers, against all odds, we have ended up in agreement. I also encourage readers to go check out the drivel you posted for themselves. The morons seeking a safe space in their little right wing echo chamber will be thrilled to hear their beliefs uncritically asserted at them, and anyone with a brain will be equally amused at how badly the author humiliates himself both in the paper and elsewhere online.

    I’m glad we were able to conclude things so amicably, enjoy your holiday weekend (if you happen to be an American)!

    • FoxyFerengi@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Not all articles that are peer-reviewed and given a doi are credible. Peer reviewers are directly contacted by the editor(s) of a journal, this can introduce bias. That journal, its current and past editor, and the sources of the opinion article have all been advised of bias.

      I already had them tagged as “Richard Dawkins lover”, had to laugh when the article they posted had Dawkins as a source almost immediately.

      • powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Take your pick of people with relevant credentials, such as PhD Developmental Biology or PhD Developmental Genetics, that signed a statement that is exactly what I’m saying:

        https://projectnettie.wordpress.com/

        […] Biological sex does not meet the defining criteria for a spectrum.

        Or someone else:

        https://www.nas.org/academic-questions/33/2/in-humans-sex-is-binary-and-immutable

        the objective truth is that sex in humans is strictly binary and immutable, for fundamental reasons that are common knowledge to all biologists taking the findings of their discipline seriously.

        Even in your best case, when you look at one of the few extremists pushing for a nonsensical redefinition of sex, they still directly admit that gamete size is binary, directly contradicting the strange claim above about a third gamete size:

        https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-science-of-biological-sex/

        When it comes to gametes, these are strictly binary – egg or sperm

        I mean c’mon, this is just silly. Crack open your textbook and read it.

      • Carnelian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        My tag for them is “Biologist Whisperer”, I like yours better tho lmao. I can only imagine the context