Yes, liberals have become science deniers...

So ever since the James Damore memo circulated there has been a sort of "circling of the wagons" regarding the liberal ideology of a fluid gender spectrum where as a society we should demand that there are no actual differences between the sexes. The ideology suggests that when the only real equality is sameness, that anyone who suggests otherwise has to be shut down and discredited. Especially if such an argument has the audacity to include anything "scientific".

typical angry white alt right attitude

Today I read another piece today from The Guardian where James Damore is declared to be part of the "radicalization of angry white men" as well as an "alt-right hero". All because he pointed out that there are studies within biology, neuroscience, and behavior psychology that suggest there is an actual difference between the sexes. I am not exactly sure how citing scientific studies makes you an "angry white man" or why neuroscience, biology, and behavioral psychology is suddenly part of the "alt right"... but perhaps that is why I am not a liberal.

This author uses the classic argument that because there is an alternate opinion or study that suggests differently than what the original argument or study suggests... that the first study is now "debunked". Ironically, by the same logic, wouldn't the existence of the original study debunk the alternate opinion as well?

Of course the link to the other article that "debunks" the claims, actually admits that the science cited by Damore does exist, but uses a typical straw man logical fallacy as the attempt to debunk it. The author of the debunking piece (who wrote a book called "how science got women wrong") suggests that all of the neuroscience arguments are tied to autism and testosterone. Of course, neither Damore or any of the neuroscientists cite any studies dealing with autism, but rather more specific studies that study brain activity of males and females. I guess the argument is that if you can question "something" that some neuroscientists might suggest, that anything anyone from that field concludes can now be deemed "debunked".  Of course, let's also not forget (as the debunker would like us to do) that the neuroscience study was only one of the many studies Damore included in his paper.

Moreover, the debunker even admits that "are" differences between the sexes, exactly in the manner that Damore and his cited studies suggest, but that they are what she calls the "tiniest of gaps".  But, as pointed out by many others, even small biological and neurological gaps between the sexes can promote tangible differences in behavior. In fact, its fair to argue that in the grand scheme of things, the biological and neurological difference between a person of genius level IQ and someone with well below average intelligence to the degree of mental retardation would be (as a matter of scale) extremely tiny (or almost non-existent).

At the end of the day, science is never perfect. Sometimes it even gets things entirely wrong. But science is supposed to be objective and removed entirely of any ideological beliefs. Any science that is predisposed to prove or disprove something for any reason "other" than the pursuit of the truth is not real science. There is no indication that any of the scientific studies that Damore cited were politically motivated by the alt right or anyone else. They appear to be simply scientific studies that draw a conclusion that runs counter to what certain political ideologies would like to believe.