No. You’re once again confusing sex with phenotype an/d genotype. The only thing that unites a large swathe of the animal kingdom in regards to sex is gamete size. If we toss that out, we lose precision
The point of the discussion is to figure out if there’s a better way to determine this, a more precise way, the point of such discussions are to move the field forward, all things in science should be questioned, and that is the way of science.
No, that is precisely my point. Sex is determined by many different factors especially across species. Sex is defined as gamete size because there’s no other coherent definition.
Can you not imagine the possibility that it isn’t the best way to determine it?
You really pick bad citations. Citing someone who says “oh i was just being ironic!” is laughable.
That still leaves my other citations in tact, and I could have much more, the point was that many people in the field agree with what i’m saying. According to the study linked before, at most 58% of scientists agree with you.
She also confuses sex and phenotypes as you have been and those other citations do.
We aren’t confused, again, this is the difference between determining and defining sex.
The point of the discussion is to figure out if there’s a better way to determine this, a more precise way, the point of such discussions are to move the field forward, all things in science should be questioned, and that is the way of science.
Can you not imagine the possibility that it isn’t the best way to determine it?
That still leaves my other citations in tact, and I could have much more, the point was that many people in the field agree with what i’m saying. According to the study linked before, at most 58% of scientists agree with you.
We aren’t confused, again, this is the difference between determining and defining sex.