 | | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) You are correct that independent corroboration is vital in verifying scientific observation. It is to the serious discredit of the "gay scientist" that no one else has made an equivalent finding, so we are better off suspending final judgment (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
This seems like as good a place as any to jump in. The research i've done shows that a gay scientist found evidence of a gay gene, but no one has been able to duplicate his results. In scientific research, that is a very serious thing. It may have (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Gay-o-meter (Was Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice... who cares!)
|
|
(...) meter told me to "Loosen up mate, Women like softer edges" or some such. Which is ironic, since most women consider me rather sensitive. I dunno. ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head (24 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) Gotta agree with Chris - the desperation seems a bit more on the other side. (...) A propensity for "gayness" may be in someone's gene, it may not. I don't discount it, but I don't accept it out of hand, either. I've been more of the opinion (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice... who cares!
|
|
(...) I did not mean to imply it would change your sexulaity. :) (...) I'm one of those cynics that thinks big homophobes have something to hide... :) Fun aside, the test illustrates a simple, but often overlooked, point: there are more than three (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
