Once upon a time, the Left complained that fundamental Christians rejected science. It manifested itself in issues related to evolution, sexual promiscuity and later, global warming. If everyone would just rely upon science alone, the world would be a better place.

But a funny thing happened between now and then. Science, it appears, far from something whose findings we should embrace, has become an obstacle to change.

This is particularly true when it comes to the transgender debate. Here, science is clear. It's a chromosome issue. And if you dig up a 3,000-year-old body, the DNA will even reveal its sex. We aren't required to rummage through the drawers of the long-dead to figure out their gender.

But in the world of the politically correct, a boy can say he's a girl, the media will ignore all known science and comply with the proclaimed gender. The boy in question can now even race girls in high school track. And when said boy turns out to be faster than the others, we're not supposed to wonder why.

Recently, James Damore was fired from Google for penning a memo theorizing that fewer women work as Google engineers because women's biological differences could result in their having different interests. His memo pointed to scientific studies about differences in women's brains, arguing that Google's unsuccessful efforts to achieve gender parity in its workforce might be in vain.

The quick response at Slate was a true sight to behold. It's as close as anyone on the Left has come to just saying it outright: "To hell with science."

The writer, Chanda Prescod-Weinstein, is touted as "a particle physicist, philosopher of science at the University of Washington." A professor. Is anyone surprised? The headline announces we must "Stop Equating ‘Science' With Truth."

And a few paragraphs in, we get this gem:

It is impossible to consider this field of science without grappling with the flaws of the institution—and of the deification—of science itself. For example: It was argued to me this week that the Google memo failed to constitute hostile behavior because it cited peer-reviewed articles that suggest women have different brains. The well-known scientist who made this comment to me is both a woman and someone who knows quite well that "peer-reviewed" and "correct" are not interchangeable terms. This brings us to the question that many have grappled with this week. It's 2017, and to some extent scientific literature still supports a patriarchal view that ranks a man's intellect above a woman's.

Note that the document that caused Google to fire Damore never said a man's intellect is superior, or anything like it. That this straw man argument would be neatly tucked into a piece railing against science is somewhat fitting.

In April of this year, critics of President Trump backed a "March for Science" in hundreds of cities across America. Their mission statement read as follows:

The March for Science champions robustly funded and publicly communicated science as a pillar of human freedom and prosperity. We unite as a diverse, nonpartisan group to call for science that upholds the common good and for political leaders and policy makers to enact evidence based policies in the public interest.

Many of those at the rally focused on climate science, apparently the only discipline where peer review and consensus are still reliable. But in an article more than a month prior to that rally, The Washington Post spoke to our Professor Prescod-Weinstein:


Chanda Prescod-Weinstein, a theoretical physicist at the University of Washington, countered that science has always been influenced by politics. She noted that she is only the 63rd black woman in American history to get a Ph.D. in physics — a degree that has been awarded to tens of thousands of researchers. That's no accident, she said.

And so science is not only not "truth" or "correct," but it's also racist.

At one time, the Left worked to purge religion from American culture. But that didn't solve their quandary. They still haven't killed off science, and it's apparently a source of no small frustration.

Charlie Richards is the network producer for the Salem Media Group.

Thinking of submitting an op-ed to the Washington Examiner? Be sure to read our guidelines on submissions.