Army Bob: Is science undeniable or a suggestion?

by Robert M. Traxler

We must believe the science, all the science, or be a damned science denier and then (according to some of the progressives who scribble in the pages of this paper) if we do not believe the end of the world is in 2030, we should not be allowed to receive treatment for cancer.

And progressives are the “compassionate” ones?

So, the science states a person born a man is a man. The science teaches us, XX chromosome male, XY chromosome female  Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), biology, anatomy all say a woman born a woman is a woman, but if you believe this you are a racist, bigot, sexist, homophobe who should be canceled, shunned, banned, and discredited. Just how that works is a mystery to me, but we are not allowed to ask the logical questions; the cancel culture will come after us hammer and sickle. 

The science tells us that men cannot get pregnant, but abortion activist Aimee Arrambide stated in front of the House Judiciary committee, under oath, that she believes men can get pregnant and have abortions. Ms. Arrambide is following the lead of the Surgeon General who agrees. Does this make sense? No, but we better not say that or we “deny science,” are politically incorrect and generally an old-fashioned dumb ass. Well, this old dumb ass cannot get his mind wrapped around how it all works while staying in the boundaries of science.  

One must be curious whether the progressive movement honestly believes that a man is a woman if they wish to be, or a woman a man? How do they fulfill the science requirement?  How do they not deny the science of anatomy? 

If you want to say someone born a man who wishes to be a woman should be referred to as a woman fine, no problem, but saying they are a woman in the eyes of science and biology is just unenlightened, politically correct, but just wrong. To say a male athlete who calls himself a woman is biologically a woman is not science, it is politically correct, but flies in the face of science fact and logic.    

Global climate change was settled science, guaranteeing the world will end in 2030. Carbon emissions coming out of China and India far outstrip the reductions North America and Western Europe have made, and vastly exceed the carbon levels set by the “reduce carbon worldwide by 5% per year” folks or the end is a scientific fact.

Many of the “end is a fact” folks indeed scribble in the pages of this very paper. We must wonder if they are planning for life after 2030? Education funds for children or grandchildren, a 30-year mortgage, an 8- or 10-year investment plan? Life insurance?  

Covid-19 also told us we must follow the science and make our decisions based on science, but a male homosapiens is not a male if he wishes to be a female. What does the science say, the undeniable science? Well it disagrees, but the science is a mere suggestion when it goes against political correctness, and an undeniable law when it supports a politically correct policy. Pick a side, any side; is science undeniable or a suggestion?

China and India get to pollute to their hearts’ content, making the stuff we must have: antibiotics, electronics and components, rare earth minerals, textiles and machinery. As only American/Canadian oil and gas destroy the planet, only North American and Western European emissions are dangerous, China and India burning train loads of soft coal per day are fine, American coal burned in much cleaner energy producing plants are a danger to the planet. The science be damned, it is the political correctness that dictates good vs bad, male vs female. My opinion.

One more thing, Arathy Somasekhar among others, reported in Reuters July 5 that five million barrels of oil from our strategic oil reserve went to Europe, and to China. We must ask, those few who dare to ask, given the cancel culture, just how that will reduce gas prices in the United States?