you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ClassroomPast6178 26 insightful - 3 fun26 insightful - 2 fun27 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

A disingenuous argument. When there was sufficient evidence for multiple chemical elements the Classical view of four elements was discarded.

Biologists would happily discard the 2 sex model, if provided sufficient evidence. The biologist who developed the evidence would probably get a Nobel prize in Physiology or some shit. The sticking point is that science doesn’t accept “I feel like a boy today, but yesterday I felt like a girl” as evidence of anything other than an individual with too few real problems.

We went through all this with the creationists in the 00s, if you don’t agree with evolutionary theory that’s great, just provide the evidence for your alternate theory and collect your Nobel. No, what’s written in a book isn’t evidence.

The shameful thing is that a lot of the people who were vocal critics of creationism have suddenly adopted this evidence-less religious belief in trans etc. it’s fucking weird.

[–]GrilledTofuIdentifying as a block of tofu[S] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

people who were vocal critics of creationism have suddenly adopted this evidence-less religious belief in trans etc.

Religious/conservatives had long pointed out that it would a matter of time before that particular group spirals into their own ivory tower of the Next Smart Thing (TM). It was called 'slippery slope', 'strawman', 'exaggeration', 'satire' and so on.

Then current year exists.