Not even close to what he said, stopped reading there.
"We can say flatly that there is no evidence that women’s biology makes them incapable of performing at the highest levels in any STEM fields."
That's nice. But that's not what Damore argued.
Rather, Damore argued that biology has a significant role in the interests of men and women, not their capabilities. There is a mountain of compelling evidence to support this claim.
There is a mountain of evidence that interests are more strongly shaped by biology than by the social environment?
That's an interesting thesis, I'd like to see that.
All I could find showed that biology had an influence, but it was orders of magnitudes smaller than all influence that social environments had.
Can I politely suggest that you look up the meaning of the term "straw man" and try to avoid doing it?