... actually, it's madder. They've been crazy for quite a while now.
What is it this time? Well, this time, they're taking sparrows and stuffing them into bins. Dig this.
Here's the tweet the editor in chief of SciAm posted about it.
I dunno, man. I've been observing sparrows and finches for a long time and it sure seems like they've got two sexes. They seem to be making a lot of baby birdies with just two of them doing the songbird equivalent of the horizontal monkey dance.
Anyway, the bin is the modern day Marxist bin, this time the straights oppress queers bin. Poor little sparrows. What did they ever do to deserve being stuffed into a bin?
If one should read the article, yes, they say that it is “as if” there are four sexes. But that is, to be kind, an exaggeration, or to be blunt, wrong. There are two sexes. There are females and males. Both sexes are nearly equally split between the color dimorphs. Yes, the aggression/nurturing taints are strongly correlated with the colors. But when mating they tend to mate with the opposite coloration (and, of course, only with the opposite sex). They make a circumstantial argument that the pairs are more likely to be successful raising the young when you have one parent of each trait. I would not be surprised if in a few centuries the most successful combination leads to a pure species with the dimorphism completely paired with the sex.
ReplyDeleteIn any case, this is not, in any way proof of, or support for, non-binary sex divisions. Anyone with a wit of science sense knows this. Just another example of how “Scientific American” has gone woke and left science behind. And just another reason I am glad I did not renew my multi-decade subscription.