The Fox News host, who has faced an advertising boycott over sexist and racist remarks, made the comment while discussing academic research into how men perceive environmentally sustainable behaviour to be a threat to their masculinity.
Speaking to climate change sceptic Mark Steyn during his show on Thursday, Carlson said: “How did we wind up with a country in which feminists do science? I mean … we're sort of bound to get a study like this, right?”
Ms Ocasio-Cortez, the Democratic congresswoman, responded on Twitter: “Democracy and civil rights is how we got a country where ‘feminists do science.’”
She added it “tells you a lot” that the Fox News presenter is “drumming up fear around women’s rights to create suspicion around climate change policy”.
Mr Carlson has previously attacked the New York representative over her calls for action to combat climate change, deriding her as “a 29-year-old former bartender [here] to teach you about science”.
He devoted a whole segment on his Monday programme to Ms Ocasio-Cortez and the Democrats’ Green New Deal, proposals designed to tackle the impacts of global warming.
During the show, he said: “Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a moron and nasty and more self-righteous than any televangelist who ever preached a sermon on cable access. She’s not impressive, she’s awful.”
The Democrat responded in a tweet: “You know we’re winning when the GOP resort to vapid, personal insults.”
Mr Carlson’s discussion with Mr Steyn – a regular Fox News commentator – focussed on research which shows environmentalism is perceived to be feminine.
A 2016 study by academics at five US and Chinese universities found that, as a result of this stereotype, suggested men “may be motivated to avoid or even oppose green behaviours in order to safeguard their gender identity”.
The research, led by James Wilkie, assistant professor of marketing at Indiana's University of Notre Dame, found men were more willing to buy environmental products if they were marketed and packaged as "more masculine".
Mr Steyn mocked the study, saying it was "very difficult to tell ... whether or not it's an ingenious parody", before ranting about US universities spending money on social science research.
Register for free to continue reading
Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism
By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists
Already have an account? sign in
Join our new commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies