The Atlantic caught pushing fake science; claimed heartbeats of unborn babies are “imaginary”

As if the left-wing media couldn’t get any further from reality, a recent article from The Atlantic went so far as to proclaim that fetal heartbeats are “imaginary” and that ultrasound technology is used to perpetuate the “myth” that unborn children are actually people.

Following the article’s publication, many people were quick to point out the bold-faced lies presented within its text.

Breitbart reports that The Atlantic caved in and issued a formal retraction of their claim “that that there is ‘no heart to speak of’ in a six-week old fetus.”

The subtitle, “The technology has been used to create an ‘imaginary’ heartbeat and sped-up videos that falsely depict a response to stimulus,” was also changed. Below is a screenshot of the article with the original subheading, courtesy of

This outrageously disingenuous piece was written and published just in time for the March of Life taking place in Washington, DC on the anniversary of Roe vs Wade. The article’s writer, Moira Weigel, tries to insinuate that ultrasounds are some kind of barbaric tool of the patriarchy; she even goes so far as to state, “Ultrasound made it possible for the male doctor to evaluate the fetus without female interference.” [RELATED: Keep up to date with the latest fake science at]

In reality, ultrasound technology is non-invasive and is used by countless female and male doctors to check on a baby, among other health conditions. A 2015 study found that of the graduate medical education class for 2013-2014,  women made up 85 percent of of all residents in obstetrics and gynecology. This would suggest that more women are practicing with ultrasounds than men. Furthermore; the notion that the ultrasound is in any way intended to oppress women is ludicrous: in pregnancy, the entire purpose of the ultrasound is to check on the baby you’re carrying. What ill will does that impose, exactly?

In addition to being a tool of the evil “patriarchy” to oppress women, Weigel alleges that this medical device was also developed to serve the pro-life agenda. She proclaims that “The origins of fetal ultrasound lie in stealth warfare,” and that  “opponents of abortion enlisted it in their cause. It became an article of faith that women would respond to seeing ultrasound images by ‘recognizing’ that the fetus gestating inside them was a ‘baby’ — and, by extension, that abortion would be murder.” (RELATED: Follow breaking news on abortions at

That is some serious spinning on the hamster wheel. First of all, ultrasound technology is not a tool enlisted by “opponents of abortion” — it is a tool used by many medical professionals, across many medical fields. To assume that the intention behind the ultrasound was to “trick” women into feeling something for the life growing inside them is, at best, a radical and unsubstantiated belief — and at worst, it’s a testament to the overwhelming paranoia perpetrated by the Left to discredit and dissuade their opposition. [Keep up with the Left’s latest propaganda tactics at]

Secondly, a woman’s “recognition” of the fetus has literally no impact on whether or not the fetus “is” a baby.  Humans give birth to babies; I know how terribly shocking that must be to read. Whether or not a woman has an ultrasound doesn’t really change that, either.

Weigel eventually revealed that the true purpose behind the nonsensical, anti-science article was actually to oppose legislation that would criminalize abortion after an unborn baby’s heartbeat can be detected. By denying the existence of a fetal heartbeat, trying to undermine the credibility of the medical device used to detect them, Weigel and others like her can insist that the technology used to measure fetal heartbeats — and the presence of said heartbeat — is some kind of mirage created by male doctors to confuse women. (RELATED: See more examples of the total stupidity of the fact-less Left at

Throughout the article, Weigel also insinuates that women shouldn’t even get ultrasounds, claiming that “science”doesn’t attribute any meaning to ultrasound images.

Apparently, if you pretend not to hear or see something, that means you can go about pretending it’s not real.



comments powered by Disqus