• @pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1511 hours ago

      it is basic biology, ie biology simplified to teach a kid in middle school. the thing is sciences don’t stop at middle school level. a lot of university education is about clarifying that things you learned before were simplified to the point that they’re practically useless if not outright wrong.

      • @Squizzy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        59 hours ago

        Light travels in straight lines, next year its a wave and then its particles. What you said isso true about uni rethreading.

        • @CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          3
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          To be fair light does travel in straight lines (more or less… ignoring that nothing travels in any set or even single path something something veritasium video), its not lights fault if a straight line in physical reality doesn’t always happen to match up with the geometry we invented.

  • @EnthusiasticNature94@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1613 hours ago

    I agree with Dr. Jey McCreight on the science.

    But for determining truth, both sides are wrong here.

    Dunning-Kruger is bad, but so is credentialism and appeal to authority.

    Many people with PhD’s have had Dunning-Kruger. Someone else mentioned Ben Carson being great at neurosurgery, but not politics.

    A PhD doesn’t make you infallible.

    I am saying this as someone who is taking graduate-level courses and will be pursuing my PhD. When I’m correct, it’s not because my future PhD causes reality to magically conform to my opinions - it’s because I rigorously looked at the evidence, logic, and formed my own conclusion that better aligns with reality.

  • @Zerush@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    …and all in between, hormonal and/or physically. “Only two genders” is false

  • Queen HawlSera
    link
    fedilink
    English
    221 day ago

    One time a woman told me that my lack of a second X Chromosome meant I would “always be a man”

    So I gaslit her into thinking her husband had klinefelters.

    I hate how Republicans think transphobia is science

  • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed
    link
    fedilink
    English
    441 day ago

    To be fair, a Person with a PhD still can have Dunning-Kruger on other subjects.

    Ben Carson is a great Neurosurgeon, but dumbass on politics.

    • @Tibi@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 hours ago

      I think it’s sus that a Math Lecturer decides to post an article about philosophy and then doesn’t describe any of the steps he took. The article basically just says i did a thing, but doesnt explain what he did/how to reproduce the result… On the other hand, philosophy is a field with many wrong conclusions and the like, so it is believable. But again in my eyes it’s not proven, since it’s just ‘one guy’ saying something and not replicated nor reproduced.

  • @LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    106
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Note how they always enshrine gender in biology, but then make all kinds of non-biological statements about what gender is.

    “XX is woman”/“Large gametes is woman”/“can conceive is woman”

    And then they’ll say

    “Women aren’t as aggressive”, “women are more emotional”, “women like being in the home more”, “those are women’s clothes”, etc.

    The only reason it’s so important for it to be biological is because of how it punishes gender non-conformity and makes the lives of trans people hell. Like it isn’t ideologically consistent and they know that. They just don’t care. If it was just about genitals or chromosomes, then why is it that gender dictates all these social things about us? The only reason to root gender in how you were born is to ensure gender roles are as rigid and immutable as possible.

    • Queen HawlSera
      link
      fedilink
      English
      8
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      The only reason to root gender in how you were born is to ensure gender roles are as rigid and immutable as possible.

      This, this right here, that’s the game, that’s the whole game. They want to punish transness and then start changing what the definition of trans is.

      “Your daughter was wearing pants, and said no when my boy asked her out, that’s trans behavior and it’s unAmerican, might have to report you to a correction agency if this shit doesn’t stop.”

      • @LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        141 day ago

        Yes, there are many species that have more than 2 sexes. Those are decided by scientific consensus.

        But sex is ultimately a category to describe the process of reproduction. By definition, this is exclusionary. It’s why conservatives fumble so much when trying to describe sex in terms of actual definitions. Inherently, it is not possible to fit every person into a table of 2 columns in that way. Sex is not a binary because human beings are not binary. There is an incredible amount of variation in our bodies.

      • Krik
        link
        fedilink
        English
        71 day ago

        Relating to humans?
        Yes but they are mutations (e. g. XXY, XXX, etc.) that often give rise to numerous biological problems or death.

        I don’t know if there are species that require more than two sexes to propagate. I never head of them.

        • @LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          8
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          You are vastly underestimating the prevalence of chromosomal variations. They are common, especially among cis women.

          I like the way you phrased that at the end. Sexes are categories that relate exclusively to the concept of progeny. If you’re not able to reproduce, you’re already kind of excluded from the sex binary. If we break the human concept of sex down to its constituent parts, it is just “can procreate”. The categories are useful in some contexts, but to state them as universal or to try and extrapolate them so widely is significantly disruptive and unhelpful. Humans are and always have been more than our reproductive anatomy. Your doctor and anyone you want to reproduce with are really the only people who need to know whether you fit into either category.

          • Krik
            link
            fedilink
            English
            51 day ago

            But that’s not more that two sexes. It’s the same number or less. A hermaphrodite isn’t a third sex, it’s two sexes side by side and a sexless cellular organism has exactly one sex.

            The distinction male/female is usually determined by measuring the size of the gametes. Female gametes are the bigger ones (e. g. ovum) and male gametes are the smaller ones (e. g. spermatozoon). There are organisms where the gametes of both sexes have the same size. So technically they have two sexes but don’t fit the categories male and female.

              • @LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                41 day ago

                Sex in the sense that we have been talking about it here is in reference to mammals. The moment you wander outside of the mammalian class of vertebrates these concepts of sex start to become far less applicable.

                There are many birds that have more than 2 sexes. Reptiles and invertebrates as well. Asexual reproduction would be classed as it’s own sex apart from any male/female system.

          • skulblaka
            link
            fedilink
            English
            41 day ago

            Correct on both counts. To make it even better, there exist some creatures that primarily mate and reproduce sexually, but can also reproduce asexually if the situation requires it - I think ants, and some reptiles, if I remember right.

  • matlag
    link
    fedilink
    English
    251 day ago

    “Yeah but science can be proven wrong an change over time, while my beliefs and biases are forever!”

  • FackCurs
    link
    fedilink
    English
    291 day ago

    Can I get a T shirt that says “I have Dunning-Krueger and your Phd looks cute”? I just have a lot of BS to share and I don’t want to be sorry about it.

  • @Zzyzx@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    241 day ago

    You know how a bunch of villains are Dr. So-and-So? I bet it’s dealing with morons talking about your area of expertise that leads to one’s villain era.

  • @rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    131 day ago

    I’m a bit uninformed on this; it seems fascinating. Do these things happen due to something unusual during the growth of a fetus? What’s the name for this phenomenon?

    • @dondelelcaro@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      291 day ago

      There’s a bunch of them, but one more common example is Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome.

      It’s also possible to have a non-functional SRY (XY but female), or to be XX with an SRY translocation (XX but male).

      Biology is complicated: pretty much anyone who says it only happens one way or is really simple is wrong.

      • JackFrostNCola
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 day ago

        Moron here: Are XY females sterile or is it possible for them to pass on the Y, along with a male partner Y gene to give the baby YY genes? Or is this combination non-viable and wont develop?

        • @Baguette@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          51 day ago

          Mothers always pass the X chromosome due to how the egg works from what I remember. The sperm determines whether you get x or y for the second part.

          There is a rare event where you can have multiple sex chromosomes, like XYY, but the X is always present (at least for humans). Considering the genes in an X chromosome are vital to life, even if we could artificially create YY, it would probably end up nonviable