Exactly What Science … Does the Left Follow?

Over the past few years, one of the rallying cries and favored slogans of the left, for many cultural and political issues at least, has been, “Follow the science!” You heard Saint Fauci and company say it ad nauseam throughout the COVID pandemic… the same man you can thank, in part at least, for starting the pandemic in the first place due to his generous donation to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

You have heard it for years coming from the Green cult, demanding that you “follow the science” of climate change, lest the world end in 10 years, as AOC has so helpfully informed us will happen if we don’t take immediate drastic action. You hear extreme left-wing doctors tell you to “follow the science” when it comes to “Gender Affirming Care” for minors, otherwise known as chemical and physical castration, mutilation, and drugging of people who are not legally old enough to consent to such procedures and practices.

But curiously, they never tell you to “follow the science” of biology, even though “Gender Affirming Care” is a topic directly and obviously related to biology. Why might that be? Could it be because biological reality would directly refute not only GAC, but topple the entire fragile house of cards that their agenda and belief system sits on?

No, the left does not want you to follow the real science of biology because it would completely blow holes in their asinine, insane political narratives. If people “followed the science” of biology, and recognized anatomical reality, then they would know that there are only two sexes, can only be two sexes, and will only ever be two sexes, and that those born with XX chromosomes will be female for life, no matter whether they mutilate themselves and no matter how much testosterone they take, and that those born with XY chromosomes will be male for life, no matter how much cosmetic surgery they get or how much makeup they wear. They would see Dylan Mulvaney and instantly recognize that ”oh, no, he’s a male” if they followed the science of biology.

They would also know that men cannot get pregnant, no matter how many times mentally disturbed people tell themselves they can, there is no such thing as a female penis, and that the only time a man would ever bleed in his pelvic area is after he gets his reproductive organs removed by a surgeon, at which point the surgeon would invert it and try to sew it back on to him in some rough shape of a female reproductive organ on the inside, and then create external organs like the Clitoris out of scrotum tissue, which they call a “vaginoplasty” to give it an air of scientific credibility, when all it is in reality is A Frankenstein-like mad science experiment.

And remember, they want to do this to children under the age of 18 without their parents’ consent because they “follow the science,” for which they have no actual empirical evidence or data supporting their approach because such a procedure has never been studied long enough or in depth enough, as Matt Walsh points out.

But why else doesn’t the left like biology? Could it be because biology indicates to them that a pregnant woman’s fetus has a heartbeat after 6 weeks of gestation, which means that it is a human being when, as far as the left is concerned, it should just be a “clump of cells”? Perhaps this inconvenient fact would interrupt The Science’s hegemony in American political discourse, and, of course, inconvenience one of the largest benefactors to The Science and the Democratic Party, Planned Parenthood. If the mother knew this dangerous science, she might be less likely to visit the death factory that gets so much support and financial backing.

But it isn’t just biology that inconveniences them, it is virology too. As early as October 4, 2020, The Great Barrington Declaration was signed by nearly 50 epidemiologists and other public health officials. In it, these real scientists voiced their concerns about what was the present COVID-19 public health policies and recommended 3 years early what The Science is just now coming around to acknowledge was true: “Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come….” They then went on to recommend natural immunity, herd immunity, and focused protection of those most vulnerable to acquiring the virus which, again, The Science is just now coming around to.

But, because both Presidents Trump and Biden listened to The Science instead of the science, “15 days to flatten the curve” turned into, give or take 1,095 days to flatten the curve…and counting. Sure these scientists who signed the declaration knew how to do science, but they didn’t know how to do The Science.

Only Dr. Fauci knew how to do The Science, which is why he waffled on every single recommendation he made, and, after settling on one, ended up getting it wrong. The Science told us to mask constantly and everywhere you go in public, including outdoors, and in your car…even though masks were ineffective at preventing transmission. The Science told us that schools must remain closed for as long as it takes to “stop the spread” … even though children were at the lowest risk of getting infected with COVID. The Science told us not only that vaccines would prevent infection, but that it would be more effective than natural immunity…and then we saw twice and thrice vaccinated people getting infected with COVID, sometimes for the second or third time.

So, why does The Science have such a dismal track record of getting things wrong? Because it is NOT the science. The Science is what is known as Lysenkoism. Named after Soviet Biologist and Agronomist Trofim Lysenko, it essentially has come to represent the fusion of real, empirical, established science, science that allows room for correction or adjustment and is subject to change with new data, with official State/Government policy. In Lysenko’s case, he completely discarded well established and credible theories of genetics that ran counter to Stalin’s official communist policies, and replaced it with a brand new theory created out of whole cloth by him, which basically insisted that nature itself was communist and would “share its genes” with other organisms when reproducing. This, of course, was nonsense, but it concurred with and supported the communist collectivized farming policies of the government and did not allow reality to get in the way of Marxist dogmatism.

Thus, we get what we have today: official government policy informed by manipulated and curated “science” that the government itself has informally demanded, scientists that collude with government to craft a scientific narrative that is completely intransigent and not willing to be adjusted in light of new evidence, and the exclusion of any scientific opinions that run contrary to the government’s agenda, goals, or official statements. The Science cannot be wrong, ever. But the science can be, and is willing to seek the actual truth instead of the government’s truth. That is why The Science should not be followed, but the science should always be followed.