Professor Richard Dawkins-There are only two biological sexes and that's all there is to it

a reply to: quintessentone

My husband is dual degreed biologist/microbiologist with Ph-level experience in bioscience. He agrees with Dawkins.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: quintessentone

My husband is dual degreed biologist/microbiologist with Ph-level experience in bioscience. He agrees with Dawkins.

I'm a guy from a small town with some education from a community college and I, too, agree with Dawkins on this matter.

a reply to: linda72

Covid. . . Trust the science
Wear masks. . . Trust the science
Climate change. . . . Trust the science

Biology. . . . .yeah, not so much.

a reply to: DBCowboy

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: quintessentone

My husband is dual degreed biologist/microbiologist with Ph-level experience in bioscience. He agrees with Dawkins.

It doesn't mean a thing when his peers don't.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: quintessentone

My husband is dual degreed biologist/microbiologist with Ph-level experience in bioscience. He agrees with Dawkins.

It doesn't mean a thing when his peers don't.

Oh that's right. You follow the science and believe in peer review when it's convenient, and then cite how science and peer review are largely irreproducible as you need to ... and you have also opined on confirmation bises too.

I suppose I will stick with my peers - the new "reality-based community".

a reply to: quintessentone

So if you had a PHD in a field, and your colleagues told you that you were an idiot and knew nothing about your field, you would believe them and quit?

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: quintessentone

My husband is dual degreed biologist/microbiologist with Ph-level experience in bioscience. He agrees with Dawkins.

It doesn't mean a thing when his peers don't.

Anyone, and I mean anyone who does not accept that there are 2 biological sexes are either trolling or so stupid, that they will believe whatever their leftist masters tell them.

So which one is it?

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: quintessentone

My husband is dual degreed biologist/microbiologist with Ph-level experience in bioscience. He agrees with Dawkins.

It doesn't mean a thing when his peers don't.

Oh that's right. You follow the science and believe in peer review when it's convenient, and then cite how science and peer review are largely irreproducible as you need to ... and you have also opined on confirmation bises too.

I suppose I will stick with my peers - the new "reality-based community".

It's just not peer review - every discipline that I look at they say the same thing about transgender/intersex spectrum that there are telltale indicators of differences, here's an example.

When it comes to sex, researchers have learned that biology can be more complicated than just ‘boy’ or ‘girl.’ For instance, some people carry two X chromosomes mixed with a fragment of a Y chromosome. These people develop into what look to be males. That happens even though the presence of two X chromosomes means that they are female, at least biologically.

It gets even more complicated when gender identity enters the picture. For more than 99 percent of the world’s population, gender identity and biological sex will agree. Such a person is called cisgender. (The Latin prefix cis- means “on the same side.”) But a small share of people experiences a mismatch between sex and gender.

Some of these people grow up feeling like they aren’t the gender the rest of the world — including their parents and doctors — sees them as. This experience is called transgender. The term transgender is distinct from one’s sexual orientation, meaning whether a person is attracted to males or females.

Transgender individuals may outwardly appear male or female. But for reasons that are still unclear, they feel like — and, eventually report knowing themselves to be — the opposite gender. Some may even identify a little bit with both genders.

www.snexplores.org...

You can hold on tightly to whatever makes you feel safe, but I will always look to science for the truth because when it comes to this subject many scientists won't touch it, but the ones that do always find something else is going on.

Peer review is just one element in how I assess information, another is the researcher's reputation, objectivity, political and religious leanings (activist with an agenda), who paid for the study, who is promoting the study results and why, etc. Many different variables go into how I look at information.

a reply to: quintessentone

Intersex is a developmental disorder. In order for it to be biologically necessary as a "third gender" or "spectrum", it would have to be proven that these chromosomal configurations are 100%necessary to the survival of the species.

Do you have that science? If not, you are shoehorning in disorders to try to serve your agenda. This is all too common in modern science. COVID should have taught you this.

As for mental spectrums. Those people are every bit as bad as the fathers who forced little Johnny into football to make him manly. You're still trying to pin people into neat little gender boxes, and you're pushing pills and surgery if they don't conform in order to make them conform.

And I say that as part of a group they are trying to jam into gender non-conforming. Leave us the eff alone with your pseudoscience. I don't care how happy the little labels make you.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: quintessentone

Intersex is a developmental disorder. In order for it to be biologically necessary as a "third gender" or "spectrum", it would have to be proven that these chromosomal configurations are 100%necessary to the survival of the species.

Do you have that science? If not, you are shoehorning in disorders to try to serve your agenda. This is all too common in modern science. COVID should have taught you this.

As for mental spectrums. Those people are every bit as bad as the fathers who forced little Johnny into football to make him manly. You're still trying to pin people into neat little gender boxes, and you're pushing pills and surgery if they don't conform in order to make them conform.

And I say that as part of a group they are trying to jam into gender non-conforming. Leave us the eff alone with your pseudoscience. I don't care how happy the little labels make you.

Intersex spectrum has not yet been categorized as a third gender, don't make things up.

Endocrine disruptors disrupting biological life in many ways - this is a reality

Neuroscience shows different brains structures in people with gender dysphoria. More studies with larger groups are on the way.

Don't be so quick to put this in the box you want it to be in, where the lid can be tightly sealed after labelling.

They have just started deep diving into this so buckle up.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: quintessentone

My husband is dual degreed biologist/microbiologist with Ph-level experience in bioscience. He agrees with Dawkins.

It doesn't mean a thing when his peers don't.

Oh that's right. You follow the science and believe in peer review when it's convenient, and then cite how science and peer review are largely irreproducible as you need to ... and you have also opined on confirmation bises too.

I suppose I will stick with my peers - the new "reality-based community".

They only follow the science that fits their agenda. Coincidentally, it's always the science that never makes any sense.

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: LSU2018
l'll correct that for you: You can lead a biased closed-minded horse to water but when they get there they will believe it is sand, not water.

As usual, you got it bass-ackwards...

I would laugh, but that too would go right over your head...

I think it's odd that so much focus is placed on arguing over how many genders there are, considering that every single person on ATS knows the media uses propaganda against us to keep us divided and fighting amongst ourselves.

The real issue-the only one worth focusing on (IMHO) is using said propaganda to mold the minds of our youth. The younger they are, the more impressionable they are, yet those who want to protect them are seen as 'domestic terrorists'.

It wouldn't be ok to radicalize children in schools to become gang members or teach them b*mb making skills and domestic terrorism, but it's ok to teach them there are 40-11 genders? And the Woke crowd can't see a difference.

Which came first; they falling IQ levels in America or the Woke fad? Perhaps they go hand-in-hand.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: LSU2018
l'll correct that for you: You can lead a biased closed-minded horse to water but when they get there they will believe it is sand, not water.

As usual, you got it bass-ackwards...

I would laugh, but that too would go right over your head...

Now, now try to control that triggering mechanism because important information like water is not sand will always allude you.

The endless debates of hammers and nails.

One hammer goes to Target to find a nail to call a groomer.
Two more hammers go after Target when they move their pride displays to the back corner of the store.
All 3 hammers convinced of their highest moral right to hammer nails. A lobotomy.

I keep hoping this will die eventually, but it has until at least 2025.

So until that time, I'll be a hammer too...


I love freaking Dawkins work, he gave me "control memes", and an evolutionary insight into the viral nature of mass psychology.

Dawkins would be the first to say this is all largely meme driven. All the memes need are redirection through iconoclasty.

General question to one of the liberal nails taking a hammering in this thread.

What are the 'intersex' options between male and female? The ones not covered by X or Y chromosome irregularities?

I feel they are all fuzzy touchy-feely self-determined identities. Sure, intersex works, but it has to stop there without a forced acknowledgement of all the special shades of Grey in between the black and white of male and female.

That's what is getting ridiculous. The degree which the grey areas need special acknowledgement. How do you apply specific labels if it's all a spectrum, anyway?

These special identities seem erroneous to biology. They form from ideas of disambiguation, that spread virally and get an obligatory color coded flag. Like forcing differentiation between a man that wants to be a "straight woman" dating men, a man that wants to be a lesbian dating 'women' (mostly other M-F 'lesbians'), or the male lesbian that doesn't want to change, but still be called a lesbian.

It's absurd. There doesn't needed to be a united sexual identities of Benneton too.

Why does anyone have to give a s# at that point?

I'm default LGBT but I now identify as a White Anglo Saxon Protestant and member of the Aryan Volk, because I miss when there was heterodoxy (pun intended) in being openly LGBT. Miss being hated. Not given a gold star for the courage and self-pride. To a time when Dire Straits didn't have to remove a verse of Money For Nothing, and that song wasn't outdated and offensive. Going back into history to update satirical (ahead of the time) character names and RETCON everything for peoples warm and fuzzies has more LGBT folk siding with a Ron DeSantis than people might think.

The longer it goes on, the higher that iconoclastic number will get.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: quintessentone

My husband is dual degreed biologist/microbiologist with Ph-level experience in bioscience. He agrees with Dawkins.

It doesn't mean a thing when his peers don't.

Hmmm..
I don't think that's how it works. If that were the case, our understanding of science would never change.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: quintessentone

My husband is dual degreed biologist/microbiologist with Ph-level experience in bioscience. He agrees with Dawkins.

It doesn't mean a thing when his peers don't.

Oh that's right. You follow the science and believe in peer review when it's convenient, and then cite how science and peer review are largely irreproducible as you need to ... and you have also opined on confirmation bises too.

I suppose I will stick with my peers - the new "reality-based community".

It's just not peer review - every discipline that I look at they say the same thing about transgender/intersex spectrum that there are telltale indicators of differences, here's an example.

When it comes to sex, researchers have learned that biology can be more complicated than just ‘boy’ or ‘girl.’ For instance, some people carry two X chromosomes mixed with a fragment of a Y chromosome. These people develop into what look to be males. That happens even though the presence of two X chromosomes means that they are female, at least biologically.

It gets even more complicated when gender identity enters the picture. For more than 99 percent of the world’s population, gender identity and biological sex will agree. Such a person is called cisgender. (The Latin prefix cis- means “on the same side.”) But a small share of people experiences a mismatch between sex and gender.

Some of these people grow up feeling like they aren’t the gender the rest of the world — including their parents and doctors — sees them as. This experience is called transgender. The term transgender is distinct from one’s sexual orientation, meaning whether a person is attracted to males or females.

Transgender individuals may outwardly appear male or female. But for reasons that are still unclear, they feel like — and, eventually report knowing themselves to be — the opposite gender. Some may even identify a little bit with both genders.

www.snexplores.org...

You can hold on tightly to whatever makes you feel safe, but I will always look to science for the truth because when it comes to this subject many scientists won't touch it, but the ones that do always find something else is going on.

Peer review is just one element in how I assess information, another is the researcher's reputation, objectivity, political and religious leanings (activist with an agenda), who paid for the study, who is promoting the study results and why, etc. Many different variables go into how I look at information.

As with rape and abortion, you are using an informal fallacy. You are trying to compare the very minute to the vast majority.

a reply to: quintessentone

It is the implication.

To say otherwise is to ignore the double standard. An intersex individual is put on a pedestal to uphold transgenderism despite being a developmental chromosomal defect just like Down's, but Down's and similar are also chromosomal "spectrums" used by the left to justify abortion.

Never let a disorder go to waste?

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: linda72

I wasn't attacking his credibility his peers are doing that, want to see more?

It's not necessary. It's all argumentum ad hominem. You haven't answered the question.