For most of my life, the common understanding was that the right denies science, that conservatives and Republicans don't believe in science, they believe in alternative facts, and the left are the ones championing true science.

The reality is, that's not true. There have been studies showing that both the left and the right equally denies science.

Denying science has nothing to do with your political ideology, it has to do whether or not you want to agree with your tribe and you want your tribe to win, and it's a bit more complicated than that.

But upon doing some research and looking at some recent events, I am now of the belief that left-wing science denial is substantially more dangerous than right-wing science denial.

There have been accusations that right-wing groups will fund scientific research that will benefit their industry and their business, and I think that's a fair argument and you can look up those studies.

But when you realize that most people in academia lean left, and the left has been embracing a moral ideology above science, then it stands to reason that our true non-partisan academia doesn't exist, and left-wing ideology, not politics, is going to take over and going to infect our actual understanding of science.

So today, I want to take a look at various articles and sources talking about the danger of science and aisle, and I want to bring up why I believe if we don't call out left-wing science and aisle right now, we're in for a dangerous future.

But before we get started, please head over to patreon.com-forthslash-timcast to help support my work.

Patrons of the backbone of the content I create, and if you like these videos and want to see more, then head over to patreon.com-forthslash-timcast and become a patron today.

The first thing I want to highlight is this video from a debate that happened in Canada on TV Ontario between Nicholas Matt and Jordan Peterson, among many others.

But the clip I want to show is a professor on television saying there is no biological sex.

Basically, it's not correct that there is such a thing as biological sex, and I'm a historian of medicine. I can unpack that for you at great length if you want, but in the interest of time, I won't.

So that's a very popular misconception.

This person is a historian of medicine, and typically I try to refrain from criticizing people who are experts in areas where I am not an expert.

However, it's just simply not true.

Biological sex absolutely does exist.

Look, science are understanding of science changes over time, but there has not been a major overhaul in the science of sex.

You can still go on Wikipedia and see that biological sex absolutely does exist. It's not controversial, even.

They say organisms of many species are specialized into male and female varieties, each known as sex.

This is a normal thing. Males tend to do one thing, females tend to do another. It's not absolute. There is nuance, but for the most part, there is male and there is female.

Human males, for instance, are typically stronger, taller, more muscle mass, more collagen, denser bones.

And human males typically, without medical or scientific intervention, cannot produce offspring.

...