[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 144 KB, 1252x1252, wIGnl73l.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8867618 No.8867618[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Is pop-science really where we are going? Is science really going to become a, "safe-space" for LGBTQA+ and the sensitive left? How do we stop the corruption of science before we no longer can question gender identity just like how we can no longer question the correlation between race and the genetic predisposition of certain traits?

>> No.8867624

>>8867618
>LGBTQA+
We're at LGBTQ'A'+ already? Damn... They're really widening the spectrum fast.

>> No.8867626

>>8867618
I'm not sure it's changed that much. If anything, Popsci has just become more absurd and just that much more obvious. Which is probably good.
But you've always had a choice between being correct and being popular. The two don't coexist well. And there will always be a market of people that want to feel smart or special without putting any work into it and a group of charlatans willing to supply the market.

>> No.8867637

>>8867618
>before we can no longer question gender idenity
But that is exactly what lgbtq is doing

>> No.8867644

Question: Why do you care how someone identifies and how are you so sure, with everything we've learned about genetics and other biological sciences over the decades and continue to learn, that gender identity isn't a spectrum?

>> No.8867646

>>8867624
It's LGBTTIQQ2SAA+

Lesbian
Gay
Bi
Transsexual
Transgender
Intersex
Queer
Questioning
2 Spirited
Asexual
Atheism+

>> No.8867648

>>8867618
>just like how we can no longer question the correlation between race and the genetic predisposition of certain traits?

uh im pretty sure you can still talk about this it's not like you get sent to jail, your just overreacting OP.

>> No.8867650

>>8867646
No, it's LGBTTIQQ2SAA+=log(QWERTY);

>> No.8867651

>>8867618
>Is pop-science really where we are going?
Pop-sci will always exist, and has existed for some time now.

> Is science really going to become a, "safe-space" for LGBTQA+ and the sensitive left?
Science will never be absorbed by politics. The only sciences that ever been influenced by ideology are the social sciences.

> How do we stop the corruption of science
Science will never be corrupted. Gender identity is not science.

>> No.8867672

>>8867644
I certainly do not care how someone chooses to identify themselves. What I care about is the idea that testosterone and estrogen sudden don't matter in what one's sex is. I hear often that gender and sex are different and if they are, that's fine. But, for most people, "gender" is specifically referring to what sexual organ is between your legs. If someone has a penis but feels that they are a women due to their biochemistry I have no issue with that. But don't tell me that there are anymore than two options for what sex you are. You either have have two X's or an X and a Y.

>> No.8867678

>>8867646
>It's LGBTTIQQ2SAA+
No, it's LGBTTIQQ2SAA+OP.

>> No.8867693
File: 23 KB, 236x368, powerpoint-macho-xx-3-728.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8867693

>>8867672
>But don't tell me that there are anymore than two options for what sex you are. You either have have two X's or an X and a Y.

How would you identify this person? They have a penis and testis but are karyotypically XX

>> No.8867719

>>8867693
This syndrome occurs in approximately four or five in 100,000 individuals, making it less common than Klinefelter syndrome

A genetic fuck up. If they were an accepted genotype and phenotype combo they wouldn't be born sterile.

Fuck off with this intersex shit. It's like saying since Cancer cells exist all my cells should be able to mutate into whatever the fuck they want

>> No.8867775

>>8867719
>it doesn't happen frequently so it doesn't count

Intersex individuals show that biological sex can have a variety of outcomes.

And viability more than fertility has to do with what is "accepted" by biology. If it wasn't accepted it would have been lethal.

And you didn't answer my question. Is that person male or female?

>> No.8867781

Wew, I haven't see /pol/ this mad in years, they are still moaning.

>> No.8867791

>>8867775
>lethal
Except that is lethal. It can't genetically reproduce.
And no they don't show that biological sex can have a variety of outcomes because they only outcome they have is not being able to reproduce.
XX syndrome patients have testes, so yeah they're male since they present it.
Not that it matters because again, they can't reproduce.

This is different from a tranny who can reproduce but fell for the transitioning meme.

>> No.8867809
File: 290 KB, 1080x1920, a5810239-17ad-49e2-a14c-2e25525cf55c..png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8867809

>>8867650
>>8867678

>> No.8867822

>>8867791
>Except that is lethal

You apparently do not understand what "lethality" means in the context of genetics.

And that goes back to
>"don't tell me that there are anymore than two options for what sex you are. You either have have two X's or an X and a Y."
which misunderstands the spectrum of results that can occur during sexual reproduction.

>> No.8867870

Reminder that /sci/ is mostly a lefty board that most probably attended the stupid march.

t. not part of the hive mind

>> No.8867885
File: 45 KB, 393x591, 1374470228107.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8867885

>>8867809
zoz

>> No.8867886

>>8867693
Would I have been diagnosed with this at birth? I was checked for downs in the womb, so I assume so.

>> No.8867893

Concrete results require concrete data. Money will be given to those who are useful.

>> No.8867897

>>8867644
Question: Why do you care if someone believes in creationism or not and works in paleontology?

>> No.8867904

>>8867822
>spectrum of results
Are you fucking serious right now?

>You apparently do not understand what "lethality" means in the context of genetics.
Right, no cystic fibrosis isn't lethal just because the patient isn't stillborn

>> No.8867920

>>8867904
CF is lethal in that the mutation causes the patients death in some manner. The SRY translocation does not.

And by your previous definition of lethal
>Except that is lethal. It can't genetically reproduce.
CF would not be considered lethal as patients with the various mutations can and do reproduce.

>> No.8867936

>>8867920
XX is genetically lethal.
It's a trait that can't continue to reproduce, mainly because nature realized it fucked up.
>>8867920
CF patients tend to die before they can reproduce, and even if they lived long enough; a CF patient with even a sliver of morality would not have kids.

>> No.8867939

>>8867886
Possibly at birth depending on how it presents. Possibly not until you fail to go through puberty properly, and maybe not until you try to have children and go to a reproductive specialist when you can't.

Certainly not something they would look for in utero.

>> No.8867943

>>8867936
>CF patient with even a sliver of morality would not have kids

95% of men are sterile, but women with CF can and do have children

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18024241

>> No.8867972

>>8867618
Yes, enjoy your secularism faggots

>> No.8867984

>>8867618
Question: How many fingers does a human hand have?
Answer: 5
Nu-science Answer: Check your privilege you bigot! What about genetic mutations that give people 6 or more fingers? What about those who have lost fingers, you ableist scum! Fingers exist on a spectrum.

>> No.8868378

>>8867618
replace peer review with objective ai

>> No.8868386

It's unclear to me whether a significant number of normies actually watch Bill Nye's new show and buy into it, or if we're all just autistically screeching about it because we're science nerds and we get really excited about anything relevant to science.