Science Deniers

Some of the most damning and derisive epithets hurled against skeptics of manmade global climate change and evolution, is "science deniers." This discussion is not to compare the relative merits of those two positions, as it has been done previously.

But the charge of "denying science" would appear to apply to certain segments of the society who tend to lean away from a more conservative position. One, is the abortion advocates or defenders. The "science" clearly proves that a baby is a human from conception until the end of gestation. And, hopefully, the debate will not continue to the postnatal existence.

The only points of differentiation between an unborn child, a newborn baby, a mature adult, and a convalescent senior citizen are their environment, their state of development or their dependency, and their value to society. None of these differentiations determines the humanness or personhood of an individual.

Therefore, any argument justifying the ending of life in any stage of existence is in defiance of science. It is a person by any scientific definition.

And the debate over sexual orientation, sexuality, gender identity, and whatever is also anti-science. Proof comes from the mouth of a defender. When he, she, or it, was confronted with the biological evidence that sex is determined by X and Y chromosomes, the proponent responded, "Why limit it to two. There are 26 letters in the alphabet!"

The "science" is a little weak there. The letters, X and Y, are not the determinants of sex, they are, excuse the term, designations that science uses for particular chromosomes. Every human has two sex determining chromosomes, one X from the mother, and the other is either X or Y from the father. Females are XX and males are XY. When they mate, each partner contributes one chromosome to the new entity. There are only two possible combinations.

So our friend from above, in propounding multiple genders, based on 24 additional genetic markers, has left science and plunged into fantasy. There are different expressions of sexuality. For instance some males have high voices, very little body hair, and slender builds. They still do, however have an XY genetic configuration.

Conversely some females have very low voices, though not as low as a growling bass, copious body hair, and robust builds. However, their genetic makeup is XX. That is science.

On a practical level, if we are going to have "identified gender" bathrooms, we actually need several dozen. Or maybe we can just revert to the old "outhouse" I grew up with. It had one hole and a hook on the inside of the door. Problem solved.

As an old scientific philosopher once affirmed. "Science is neither good nor bad. It is neutral. How you use science is what makes it good or bad." Wise man.