Growing up in the days of mid-20th century innocence, young boys trying to determine if a girl liked them randomly selected a wildflower known as the Black-Eyed Susan to determine the answer. The flower was easily identified in a grassy field by the numerous yellow petals attached to its center. The young lad would then pull the petals off, one-by-one, alternately reciting, “she loves me, she loves me not”—with the last one revealing the girl’s level of interest.

This is similar to what former vice president Kamala Harris has been doing on her book tour. She has alternated between telling us, while in office, not to heed the science on an issue only to suggest now science is the answer.

Her latest “now I am a scientist” moment occurred as Harris criticized the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. She has branded the agency’s actions as “criminal,” suggesting somewhat matter-of-factly that she possesses some expertise in the sciences.

During a podcast chat with host Kara Swisher, Harris reminded listeners of that expertise since she suggested, after all, she is the daughter of a scientist. (Her late mother, Shyamala Gopalan, was a health scientist before she died in 2009.) While a bit farfetched to say that imbues her with any scientific expertise, it does raise an issue about her flexibility in accepting and rejecting science.

Harris lambasted Kennedy and his agency saying, “When I see what these people are doing right now to end the war on cancer, to deny science and fire scientists … it’s personal for me…What they are doing to push misinformation and lies at the highest level of government — it’s criminal. And people will die because of what they’re doing. I can’t laugh about that, I’m sorry.”

In her rant, Harris seemed to be promoting the point that all scientists have an obligation to consider real facts, but DHHS is now failing to do this. While facts always matter, Harris herself seems to have previously ignored those that a scientist should consider. She has long been a supporter of transgenderism, although she suggests she has some reservations about allowing transgender females to participate with biological females due to advantages the former have in muscle mass, speed, etc. But in her memoir, Harris insists such challenges “can be resolved with goodwill and common sense…without vilifying and demonizing children.”

The truth of the matter is Harris dismisses science in taking such a position. Biological sex is determined at conception, and it cannot be changed through cross-dressing, synthetic hormones, or surgical means. Transgender “females” and biological females are not the same and never will be. A medical study published in January 2022 looked into the gap differential revealed by better running performances achieved by men over women finding:

Males consistently outperform females in athletic endeavors, including running events of standard Olympic distances (100 m to Marathon). The magnitude of this percentage sex difference, i.e., the sex gap, has evolved over time. Two clear trends in sex gap evolution are evident; a narrowing of the gap during the 20th century, followed by a period of stability thereafter. However, an updated perspective on the average sex gap from top 20 athlete performances over the past two decades reveals nuanced trends over time, indicating the sex gap is not fixed…Explanations for the sex difference in absolute performance and competition depth include physical (physiological, anatomical, neuromuscular, biomechanical), sociocultural, psychological, and sport-specific factors. It is apparent that females are the disadvantaged sex in sport….

Another study showed, although after about a year of interventions, trans “females” did reflect a reduced physical capability more equal to their biological counterparts, they still retained unfair advantages because of their male genetic composition.

To be absolutely fair to all involved, there is really only one way for transgenderism to become a part of competitive sports. Although it involves defying science by accepting the existence of four distinct “genders”—transgender male and female, and biological male and female—athletic competition could then be confined to only those qualifying within each category.

It would be interesting to ask Harris where she stands concerning science on the existence of God. However, drawing on the work of philosophers, 63 Nobel Prize winners and over 100 leading scientists, a book translated from French into English just released this month tells us, while many people believe science and a belief in God are incompatible, recent scientific advancements suggest the opposite. Too bad the Biden/Harris administration did not spend time investigating this issue rather than investigating innocent Catholics.

Harris needs to recognize that the “goodwill and common sense” for which she advocates, whether the issue is transgenderism or something else, involves always accepting the science, and not doing so just when it is politically convenient.

Image: Public domain via Picryl.