Comment on Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy
powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 2 days agoAgain, not undiscernable. Are you able to understand that?
Comment on Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy
powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 2 days agoAgain, not undiscernable. Are you able to understand that?
davidagain@lemmy.world 2 days ago
I love that you admit that you can’t do it and even that the greatest experts mightn’t be able to do it but yet still believe it’s a useful definition! It’s a useless and crap definition! Actually useless! Complete crap!
Chromosomes are testable. Verifyable. Take a blood sample, some time in the lab and it’s done! This is why scientists use them to define sex. Your definition is untestable! It’s not science. It’s pseudoscience. It sounds plausible because it uses technical terms, and stupid people believe it because it sounds clever. But because you believed trump, who is famously very stupid, you have believed a stupid thing, and you can’t stop talking about it, in public!
If I found out that trump had duped me into believing some pseudoscience, I would be ASHAMED. You, not so much.
powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
Sadly I think you missed this. Again, not undiscernable. Are you able to understand that?
You should let the author of this text book know that his definition is complete crap lol:
oftenawake@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
Wow stop the press! The author of a textbook says there are only two sexes!
The. Author. Of. A. Textbook!
powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
In addition to the other links I’ve already posted to peer-reviewed papers explaining the same thing, yes, the fact that you can find the same definition in any textbook on biology shows that is a useful definition that’s used widely across the field of biology.
You can’t cite anything to the contrary.
davidagain@lemmy.world 2 days ago
You’re so clever.
powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
Do you need help understanding?