22. april var Earth Day og det fejredes blandt bekymrede miljøaktivister og venstrefløjsere, der blot godt kan lide den gode følelse bekymring på klodens vegne med happenings og taler og opslag og slukket lys – og måske et attentatforsøg på klimaskeptikere. Og rundt omkring i verden var der marcher for videnskaben. Quartz havde uden ironi samlet billeder af, hvad de mente var de bedste skilte. Indrømmet, der er nogle morsomme iblandt, som “I’m not a mad scientist, I’m furious!”, “The universe is made up of protons, neutrons, electrons and morons!” og et billede af Albert Einstein, der siger “Science cuts make me relatively angry!”.

Men når man arrangerer en march møder kun venstrefløjen op, så der er også billeder af børn, der holder skilte de umuligt kan forstå, som et spædbarn, der takker videnskaben for poliovaccinen og en lille piger der marcherer under et skilt med påskriften “Future scientist!” – og så må vi håbe hendes talenter og ønsker for sit eget liv ikke kommer til at skuffe de håbefulde forældre.

Og når venstrefløjen er mødt op, blandes alle deres sorger sammen. Den største er Donald Trump, fordi han vil skære i det amerikanske miljøagentur EPAs økonomi og hæmme dets magtbeføjelser.

Det var derfor Einstein var relativ vred og videnskabskvinden med skiltet ikke var gal, men rasende. I EPA er alle enige om den menneskeskabte klimakatastrofe, og hvis ikke, kan man blive sagsøgt. Det er de ikke det mindste sure over. De vil have fagfællebedømt evidensbaseret forskning og Trump er et (meget slankt) rovdyr, der rimer på en snyder. Øvkayyy, men hvad betyder dette så?

Jeg kommer altid til at tænke på en Gary Larson tegning, af et dinosauerkonvent, hvor en dinosauer udlægger deres fremtidsperspektiv; “Jordens klima er under forandring, en kæmpe komet har kurs mod os og vi har alle en hjerne på størrelse med en valnød!” når dinusauerne nævnes på denne måde. Vi ved stadig ikke hvorfor de uddøde, den førende teori holder på et meteornedslag, men klimaforandringer, måske som følge af dette eller en abnorm vulkansk aktivitet er helt sikker også en af de faktorer, der har sine fortalere. Men hvordan så dinoernes verden så ud? Ifølge Queensland Museum var der varmt

When dinosaurs ruled the Earth, the climate was most likely hot and humid. There is no evidence of Ice Ages or glaciations found in rocks of this age. There is a lot of evidence of tropical species existing at this time. Atmospheric carbon dioxide was close to present-day levels. The ice caps at the North and South Pole had melted, resulting in raised sea levels. Australia was breaking away from Antarctica and gradually moving away from the South Pole, closer to the Equator.

Ligner det ikke det trusselsbillede vi får fra FN? Under alle omstændigheder overtog pattedyrerne styret af Jorden, så for vores vedkommende er klimaforandringer vores eksistensberettigelse. Det kan man synes er skidt, bevares, men det er bare sådan det er.

Man kan også synes at der er for få kvinder der bidrager med noget fornuftigt og understrege dette

Uden at forklejne bidragyderne enkeltvis, så står det samlet set lidt sløjt til, når Jane Goodall skal med. Men at hylde kvinders bidrag bygger på en antagelse om, at der eksisterer to køn, en antagelse, som er under angreb fra radikale ideologer, der hævder at køn er en personlig opfattelse. Allum Bokhari skriver i Breitbart

If their [March for science] priority truly is science, and not pushing a particular political doctrine, then they should have no problem acknowledging the following scientific facts, which are a frequent cause of panic, outrage, and denialism on the left.

1) There Are Only Two Genders

This fact is particularly popular amongst people who question the “science march’s” commitment to, well, science.

The idea that there are only two genders, male or female, and that you have to be born either one or the other is a basic truth acknowledged by most people.Biologically, it is irrefutable: humans are a sexually dimorphic species. The only exceptions are the tiny minority of intersex people, who in very rare cases are born with chromosomal types that do not align with regular male-female patterns.

That’s the only exception. If you are not intersex, you are a man or a woman. You certainly aren’t one of Facebook’s 58 gender options, which extend to “lesboflexible,”“agender” and “pansexual.”

Will the Science March organizers acknowledge this inconvenient truth? They certainly haven’t done so yet. And given that feminists bullied them out of using the word “female,” it may be a long time coming.

2) Race is Not a Social Construct

Sorry Rachel Dolezal, you’re white. The case for a biological basis for race, and all the differences of skin color, height, weight and physical characteristics that come with it, is overwhelming. Indeed, the biology of race is so real that you can trace it with a DNA test.

(…)

5) Men and Women Are Born Different

The Science March has made a big deal out of the lack of diversity in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math). “The lack of inclusivity and diversity in STEM thwarts scientific advancements,” says an official statement on the march’s website.

But diversity in STEM, particularly gender diversity, is not something that can be solved by policy. Feminists insist that the lack of women in some STEM fields, like physics, is caused by entrenched sexism. However, these accounts consistently fail to explain why this alleged sexism is nowhere to be found in biology, where 58 percent of doctorates, bachelor’s, and master’s degrees are awarded to women. Or in zoology, psychology, and veterinary science — all scientific fields, all dominated by women. So why do women choose the latter, but not the former? It it just sexism?

The answer can again be found by looking at studies that trace the innate differences, and preferences, of men and women. Autism expert Simon Baron-Cohen has been studying the differences between men and women for over a decade, ever since he discovered that boys were far more likely than girls to develop autism. His research has found that boys (on average) are born with brains oriented towards understanding systems rather than people, emotions, and living things.

This is backed up by research on newborns, which show clear differences between male and female newborns in their preferences. Before they are nine months old, infants show gendered preferences with regards to toys, with male infants gravitating towards trucks and mechanical objects, and girls gravitating towards dolls. The study on newborns in particular helps rule out the the theory that sexist influences from a child’s social environment are the cause of gender differences.

Og i en opfølgende artikel om transidentitet og den bizarre Bill Nye ‘The Science Guy’ (guy!) skriver han “The left has infantilized its audience to such a degree that the primary way to get them to agree is to use a voice of authority from their childhood, speaking it what’s possibly an even more dumbed-down tone”. Vise ord.

Drokles blogger på www.monokultur.dk