Science Updates

Sciences, Environmental/Climate issues, Academia and Technical interests
Post Reply
User avatar
Rorschach
Posts: 14801
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:25 pm

Re: Science Updates

Post by Rorschach » Wed Feb 13, 2013 12:05 pm

Hmmm.... I'm sorry but those FACTS seem to negate the rest of your article.

Happy for you to prove me wrong by submitting the image of the front page news item that states differently.
DOLT - A person who is stupid and entirely tedious at the same time, like bwian. Oblivious to their own mental incapacity. On IGNORE - Warrior, mellie, Nom De Plume, FLEKTARD

User avatar
annielaurie
Posts: 3148
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:07 am

Re: Science Updates

Post by annielaurie » Wed Feb 13, 2013 6:06 pm

No one is going to "prove" anyone right or wrong on this issue for a long time, so hold your horses.

Scientific method is painstaking, requiring observation, gathering of evidence, controlled study, hypotheses submitted in writing by biologists and geneticists to be reviewed by their peers within the science community around the world, and so on.

All of this takes time. Science is a process. There is no definite "fact" about anything yet. There will be no frontpage headline announcing, "Science proves gays are made, not born!"

Rorsch, have you got any evidence to submit to support your "fact" that there is no gay gene, and that gay sex is a choice that can easily be reversed?

There may not be "proof" there is a gay gene just yet, but there probably will be in time. Because the evidence is already leading in that direction. Just hold your horses.
.

User avatar
Neferti
Posts: 18113
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:26 pm

Re: Science Updates

Post by Neferti » Wed Feb 13, 2013 6:22 pm

annielaurie wrote:No one is going to "prove" anyone right or wrong on this issue for a long time, so hold your horses.

Scientific method is painstaking, requiring observation, gathering of evidence, controlled study, hypotheses submitted in writing by biologists and geneticists to be reviewed by their peers within the science community around the world, and so on.

All of this takes time. Science is a process. There is no definite "fact" about anything yet. There will be no frontpage headline announcing, "Science proves gays are made, not born!"

Rorsch, have you got any evidence to submit to support your "fact" that there is no gay gene, and that gay sex is a choice that can easily be reversed?

There may not be "proof" there is a gay gene just yet, but there probably will be in time. Because the evidence is already leading in that direction. Just hold your horses.
:rofl Gays and Lesbians need a scientific method to prove why they are Homosexual. Get real. They do it because it "excites" them.

The same as paedophiles get excited about kids and some people get excited about their dog's bums.

I know females who married and had children and when hubby cheated or they got sick of him, they decided they preferred females .......... :o

I have a nephew who is "gay". I picked this when he has about 13-14. His parents denied it because he had "lots of girlfriends" until he was "living with" a guy who was obviously "gay". I think they realise that he will only "marry" a male these days. :D

User avatar
Rorschach
Posts: 14801
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:25 pm

Re: Science Updates

Post by Rorschach » Wed Feb 13, 2013 11:00 pm

annielaurie wrote:No one is going to "prove" anyone right or wrong on this issue for a long time, so hold your horses.

Scientific method is painstaking, requiring observation, gathering of evidence, controlled study, hypotheses submitted in writing by biologists and geneticists to be reviewed by their peers within the science community around the world, and so on.

All of this takes time. Science is a process. There is no definite "fact" about anything yet. There will be no frontpage headline announcing, "Science proves gays are made, not born!"

Rorsch, have you got any evidence to submit to support your "fact" that there is no gay gene, and that gay sex is a choice that can easily be reversed?

There may not be "proof" there is a gay gene just yet, but there probably will be in time. Because the evidence is already leading in that direction. Just hold your horses.
Honestly Annie I asked first don't you think it's a bit unfair to answer by asking a question?
There's just as much chance that they won't find one Annie.
I note some bias creeping in there...
1/ I did say as yet
2/ I never mentioned reversing or needing to reverse anything. Bad Annie.

My proof? So far it hasn't been discovered. No GAY gene.
Re the article...
Italian researchers have made a new discovery that solidifies the understand that homosexuality — at least in men — has a strong genetic component. Though this study does not identify a specific gay gene, which probably does not exist, it does demonstrate what role genetics play.
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/06/1 ... sexuality/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Having read up on the study, I'd say the so-called conclusions are more opinion than real facts. That's not to say it is not an interesting idea. But not one I think will survive in its present form. There tends to be a bit of misogyny and stereotype involved in the thinking (typically Italian BTW) and unless there was a twins study to back it up and unless no ugly women have gay progeny I think the odds are against it being correct.

Also I think twisting the language to make a biological principle fit is a really long bow.
DOLT - A person who is stupid and entirely tedious at the same time, like bwian. Oblivious to their own mental incapacity. On IGNORE - Warrior, mellie, Nom De Plume, FLEKTARD

User avatar
IQS.RLOW
Posts: 19345
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 10:15 pm
Location: Quote Aussie: nigger

Re: Science Updates

Post by IQS.RLOW » Wed Feb 13, 2013 11:13 pm

Annie is all over the shop on this subject saying that she doesn't believe it is a choice yet introduces the contradiction of situational homosexuality
Think of it as the attraction and attempt of individuals to "mate" with same sex partners, because of a natural selection mechanism in populations of some mammals in environments where there is overcrowding.
You cannot believe that it is not a choice and simultaneously believe in situational homosexuality
Quote by Aussie: I was a long term dead beat, wife abusing, drunk, black Muslim, on the dole for decades prison escapee having been convicted of paedophilia

User avatar
AiA in Atlanta
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:44 pm

Re: Science Updates

Post by AiA in Atlanta » Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:54 am

Rorschach wrote:
Do you find men alluring AiA is that your problem?
A rather cheap shot, don't you think?

User avatar
annielaurie
Posts: 3148
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:07 am

Re: Science Updates

Post by annielaurie » Thu Feb 14, 2013 3:50 am

IQS.RLOW wrote: Annie is all over the shop on this subject saying that she doesn't believe it is a choice yet introduces the contradiction of situational homosexuality
Think of it as the attraction and attempt of individuals to "mate" with same sex partners, because of a natural selection mechanism in populations of some mammals in environments where there is overcrowding.
You cannot believe that it is not a choice and simultaneously believe in situational homosexuality
Think in terms of "situational homosexuality" in large populations, and over subsequent generations.

This is where natural selection comes in. Genetic code could possibly modify itself so that subsequent generations are born more suited to the situation.

If in certain groups a population of mammals is too dense, genetic code might be able to modify itself to produce some of the offspring, male or female, incapable or uninterested in mating with opposite sex partners, to reduce their numbers: fewers individuals, less crowding, etc.
.

User avatar
Rorschach
Posts: 14801
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:25 pm

Re: Science Updates

Post by Rorschach » Thu Feb 14, 2013 9:36 am

AiA in Atlanta wrote:
Rorschach wrote:
Do you find men alluring AiA is that your problem?
A rather cheap shot, don't you think?

No I don't... are you homophobic?

You made a statement AiA.... I merely asked a question based on it.

The cheap shot, the repugnant shot, came from you previously.
DOLT - A person who is stupid and entirely tedious at the same time, like bwian. Oblivious to their own mental incapacity. On IGNORE - Warrior, mellie, Nom De Plume, FLEKTARD

User avatar
Rorschach
Posts: 14801
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:25 pm

Re: Science Updates

Post by Rorschach » Thu Feb 14, 2013 9:38 am

annielaurie wrote:
IQS.RLOW wrote: Annie is all over the shop on this subject saying that she doesn't believe it is a choice yet introduces the contradiction of situational homosexuality
Think of it as the attraction and attempt of individuals to "mate" with same sex partners, because of a natural selection mechanism in populations of some mammals in environments where there is overcrowding.
You cannot believe that it is not a choice and simultaneously believe in situational homosexuality
Think in terms of "situational homosexuality" in large populations, and over subsequent generations.

This is where natural selection comes in. Genetic code could possibly modify itself so that subsequent generations are born more suited to the situation.

If in certain groups a population of mammals is too dense, genetic code might be able to modify itself to produce some of the offspring, male or female, incapable or uninterested in mating with opposite sex partners, to reduce their numbers: fewers individuals, less crowding, etc.
Annie... China? india?
DOLT - A person who is stupid and entirely tedious at the same time, like bwian. Oblivious to their own mental incapacity. On IGNORE - Warrior, mellie, Nom De Plume, FLEKTARD

User avatar
AiA in Atlanta
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:44 pm

Re: Science Updates

Post by AiA in Atlanta » Thu Feb 14, 2013 1:13 pm

Rorschach wrote:
AiA in Atlanta wrote:
Rorschach wrote:
Do you find men alluring AiA is that your problem?
A rather cheap shot, don't you think?

No I don't... are you homophobic?

You made a statement AiA.... I merely asked a question based on it.

The cheap shot, the repugnant shot, came from you previously.

As usual no one knows what in God's name you are blathering about Roach :roll:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests