Thats because people on the left keep bringing birth defects and other rare illnesses into the argument. People with the XX chromosomes, people born with a vagina, people who can have babies, people who have a period through most of their lives etc are all correct. 

True. There you find people who dont know what a woman is...

You bring up an example that doesn’t help your point. “That language and speech have major influence” is by your own admission not factually incorrect, we just don’t know for sure to what extent it does. It also isn’t a left wing idea, but one pushed equally by the right when they find it convenient.

Either way, that is not equivalent to making factually incorrect statements like climate change isn’t real or isn’t mainly caused by human activity, or Donald Trump won the 2020 election, or vaccines don’t work, or the January 6th rioters were ANTIFA. That’s detached from empirical reality.

Pretty true. If you have a side that normalizes viewpoints that conflict with objective reality, naturally you have room for a wider variety of viewpoints.

"Opinions" such as "space is fake and gay" are just not something you find on the left.

I've never seen anyone on the left deny that a biological women is a woman, so I think this relates more to "liberalism" underpinned with the backing that sex isn't as fixed as society treats it and provisions need to be made to accommodate the support of minority groups who's gender relationship is at odds with their sex, whether it be down to biological conditions or psychological.

Not the sole domain but damn if they aren't way better at accepting them overall. Some estimates I've seen are that 70% of republicans believe in the 2020 conspiracy. Is there anything you can point to on the left that is simultaneously so obviously factually wrong yet so completely accepted?

I think there is a flower outside who thinks its a tree. You as a biochemist should go out and assure it that it can be a tree if it really wants to.

He doesn't need to. Many flowers are trees and many trees flowers, in the biological sense. Flowers are "the reproductive structures of flowering plants." Flowering plants is a biological grouping called Angiosperms. Tree is actually not clearly defined, but however the definition, I think most people include an oak as tree, and oaks are angiosperms, so in a biological sense flowers or more precisely having flowers.

Why are we using the framing of right wing weirdos on a study that doesn't make such claim?

This was mapping the responses to 8 questions:
Should abortion be illegal?
Should the government take steps to make incomes more equal?
Should all unauthorized immigrants be sent back to their home country?
Should the federal budget for welfare programs be increased?
Should lesbian, gay, and trans couples be allowed to legally marry?
Should the government regulate business to protect the environment?
Should the federal government make it more difficult to buy a gun?
Should the federal government make a concerted effort to improve social and economic conditions for African Americans?


This is just an indication on responses to these questions and nothing else.
*the claim "the right has more diversity of thought than the left" isn't even asserted by the study itself*

If I asked 1000 people a question on "should slavery come back" and group A all said no and group B had a wide range of Yes, No and Maybe, I wouldn't frame the results as "Group B has more diversity of thought" unless I obviously had some agenda behind it because that's not the conclusion nor what the people who wrote the study even said.

Do better man you've been here long enough