Pretty sure every scientific measure I ever learned has confirmed that gender is a biological fact, but places do not seem to think so. Climate change, according to many faked documents in the Wikileaks documents, is in fact likely a hoax. I just want to get this on record. Climate is a definite fact, but gender is not?
The people that are trying to put both pieces of insanity forward do not care about the established, proven ways of determining what is fact and what isn't. When you lie, your goal is to change the game, not the outcome.
Gender is a fact. Don't think many on either side of the discussion would argue that. There is just disagreement on whether a person should be able to self-identify as a gender other than that at birth because it is a more comfortable role for them to occupy. If such identification causes no harm to others, then one side is arguing that they should be allowed to do so and be accorded all the rights and protections of law. Ain't rocket science. In the near future, through scientific advancements, such identification may be altered to the point of making it indistinguishable from a natural gender, so this argument may be moot. As for climate change - science is a process, not an absolute. There is no Law of Climate Change. So the study continues and so far, there are a number of indexes which show that human contribution to climate change is a probability (it is actually physically impossible for a living organism in an environment NOT to have some effect on said environment). If your theory is that scientists can be bought, then you would have to agree that there is the potential for ALL scientists to be bought, so any data provided by any research facility on both sides of the argument would be suspect - so your "hoax" statement would have to be viewed as equally being a hoax.
Just look at Wikileaks regarding climate science. They were bought. It's very easy to make up science to an actual result, much more difficult to make a hypothesis, come up with actual data to support it without altering data. As for gender, non binary is a real thing, states aren't requiring a gender. That tells me states no longer believe in basic science, so **** off on climate change.
If your hypothesis is that scientists can be bought, then you would have to agree that scientists on both sides of the climate argument could be bought. Your argument that only scientists who deny climate change can be trusted is both asinine and disingenuous. That tells me your views of science are political - not scientific ... so I wish you the same.
Sex is physical, gender is what you identify with. Can you show me these wikileaks? What is causing the climate change instead of CO2?
