Started By
Message

re: One step closer to tying homosexuality to the human genome

Posted on 11/20/14 at 7:07 pm to
Posted by ctiger69
Member since May 2005
30616 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 7:07 pm to
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/17/16 at 8:52 am
Posted by Roger Klarvin
DFW
Member since Nov 2012
46555 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 7:11 pm to
quote:

HAHAHA, you pull up an ancient article from 1991!!!


Which makes it roughly 3,000 years more recent than the text you are basing your belief on.
Posted by ctiger69
Member since May 2005
30616 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 7:11 pm to
"The Guardian is hoping readers won't notice how deliberately and intentionally the paper has purposely avoided any word that might even suggest biological causation. "Influenced by, affected, some impact, played a role, involved." Not exactly a rousing case for the "born that way" crowd.

It even gets worse from there:

"The gene or genes in the Xq28 region that influence sexual orientation have a limited and variable impact. Not all of the gay men in Bailey's study inherited the same Xq28 region. The genes were neither sufficient, nor necessary, to make any of the men gay."

I'm not sure it gets any clearer and less ambiguous than that: "The genes were neither sufficient, nor necessary, to make any of the men gay."

One problem all along for gay activists is that even a cursory survey of sexual orientation among identical twins makes the "born that way" meme impossible to accept.

Identical twins have identical DNA, which is why they are called identical twins. If one has blue eyes, so will the other. If one has black hair, so will the other. If one is tall, so is the other.

If sexual orientation is genetically determined, then the concordance rate among identical twins should be 100%. If one twin is gay, so should be the other. Alas, the concordance rate, according to researchers Peter Bearman from Columbia and Hannah Bruckner from Yale, is somewhere between 5% and 7%. Oops"


"The flawed thinking behind a genetic test for sexual orientation is clear from studies of twins, which show that the identical twin of a gay man, who carries an exact replica of his brother's DNA, is more likely to be straight than gay. That means even a perfect genetic test that picked up every gene linked to sexual orientation would still be less effective than flipping a coin."

In other words, the genetic evidence for biological causation is so poor you'd have better luck predicting orientation by throwing darts blindfolded.






Roger Roger, that was way to easy to crush your 1991 dumb arse article


Any more articles from the 90's and 80's I can rip apart for you.


This post was edited on 11/20/14 at 7:14 pm
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram