Nature vs. Nurture...the debate will rage on for decades. The truth, by the way, is almost certainly somewhere in the middle; my prediction is that science will prove that we have genetic dispositions for things that can be triggered or activated by some environmental factors.

 

Yes lets forget the rest of your losing argument.

I didn't say there was not a correlation, what I said was that they were unproven theories. They are just theories. As the holder of a bachelors in micro cell biology I would think that you would know what a theory was.


I didn't have to disprove a theory, because it is a theory means it is unproven.

From the article:

"...The present data support the hypothesis that

Hypothesis anyone, present data anyone? Who knows what future data will show? It may prove or disprove this theory. I'd rather not speculate or rely on the mirad of hypothesis put forth on the subject. The fact is that man is capable of cognitive reasoning that is unparralleled in the animal kingdom. An animal can't say. "I'm homosexual." An animal just is, in its natural state. Man is more than a mere animal and we have long since exsisted in our natural state. If you don't believe that then I guess comparing us to mice and rats and drawing the conclusion that it must be the same in both species because it is in one would be proof enough for you.

Holy ****! People get dissected?!

Well damn if that aint scientifical proof! LOL! "Usually means something"?
All the time, or usually? Do we always know what that something may be? Are we absolutely sure in this case? No.


This theory may never be proven because it would be nearly impossible to disect enough gays and straights to get rock solid evidence. Not that I wouldn't be skeptical if we did. And are we talking about the hypothalamus in mice or in people? Because that study had soley to do with mice. The article said nothing about a study on people other than implying that because there are theories that say "this may be the cause of homosexual behavior in mice" so it must be true for humans, instead its a fact in humans and a theory in mice?!



Back it up there Einstein. Your whole argument in its entirety is based on theories. I don't know why there is homosexuality in man and beast, neither do the scientists that study it. They are just drawing conclusions (guessing) based on "present data" how they interperet that data is entirely up to them. I'm sure if that have left leaning political views then that data is more likely to support those views. They are just people, no matter what control you use in an experiment it must be interpereted by a person. And people are not infalible. You are a dumbass. I've know people whom experimented with homosexuality, was that their choice or did that have to do with their hypothalamus? What about bisexuals, or people that are attracted to animals. Is that because of the size of their hypothalamus too? If someone is attracted to people of the same sex but they choose to have sex with only people of the opposite sex is that not their choice? You don't have to do anything to show me it isn't a choice because you neither have the mental capacity nor the solid proof that it would take.


What is wrong with you! Cut the bull****! Stop trying to paint me as some religious wack job. My arguments are infinitely more coherent then yours regardless of my religious beliefs.

Studies, leading to theories I have not, nor need not discredit. They are studies to formulate theories and a theory is, "An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture."

 

I am astonished. Believe all of the guess work you want man. Good luck with that.


You must have been some researcher, we do know a lot of facts concerning science and research has proven many a theory to be either false or fact. This particular theory has not passed scientific muster enough to be fact. But you won't listen to reason. I'm some right wing nut job and your morally superior because of an unproven science.


I was poking fun at you, with all of your links to homosexual animals. But hey you have a bachelors. You knew that right?

Yeah they know I think its wrong on top of icky. But I'm not pushing my beliefs on them, nor am I constantly trying to get them to see the light. We have a mutual understanding that it is their choice what lifestyle they live and likewise it is my choice what lifestyle I live wether or not we think its wrong or right. Why would I need to lie about knowing gays? I've lived in Northern CA for 17 yrs. You don't think I've gone to school with, worked with, socialized in some way with homosexuals?! That would be hard to believe, not that I know them!

 

I'm sure you know much more about the subject than I do, but I agree FWIW. There's a lot to be investigated, and I'm not sure what the right answer will be here. I just don't think this is an issue that's been proven either way yet.

 

Nope, Unregistereds research in micro cell biology on the intraweb proved it.

 

Aren't you confusing Hypothosis and Theory?

The hypothosis is the unproven idea, it becomes a theory only after it is found to hold up to scientific testing, evidence, and peer review.

 

Read up on homosexuality and choice. There is a direct corelation between the hypothalums and being gay. Nothing in science is 100%. Theories are proven all the time wrong. That is one of the first things you learn as a scientest. The difference is these are animals they have drives which make them do something by just being born. There thought process lean towards certain ways because of that fact. Sexual reproduction is one of those drives, that is had in all spieces. My point being is that it goes against everything in nature what they are doing. Also the corelation between the fact that they also have the same distinct difference in there hypothalums as humans. Which would lead almost anyone to conclude that they are BORN this way. A lot of studies lean to this. But the fact is that some can make a choice but over 95% of homosexuals say they where born like that. And science backs that statement.

 

Read up on what a theory is. Moron. I'll get back to this after this weekend but you are wrong. And the reason I said forget the rest of the stuff is because this baffled me on how stupid you can be.

 

Again wrong. Everything in science is guess work. NOTHING in science is concidered 100% fact. I could get into this in great debth but I don't have time right now. So sad how wrong you are.

 

See you have to understand that in all research there is a percent that doesn't add up. Its the error of the study. In this situation "choice" ie those choosing to be gay. Is that percent. Its pretty well established in the scientific community that its not a choice for the majority of homosexuals.

 

Funny guy what background do you have in any biological field? How many years did you work doing research? I got my degree from one the best public universities in america. You? To say I don't know my stuff is laughable.

 

Ooops you beat me to it. And theories are on a constant basis being proven wrong. But hey deyes thinks if something isn't 100% its wrong. Sad. Doesn't understand basic research principles.

 

There's also a direct correlation between an enlarged hippocampus and being a london cab driver. Correlation is not causation. What we find in the brain doesn't necessarily tell us anything about choice. How do you know the difference isn't a result, rather than a cause, of their being homosexual?

The "this is in the brain therefore we don't have a choice" argument confuses me. Does this mean that, when people make a choice, they don't use their brains, because if some part of the brain is involved it couldn't possibly be a choice?

 

The scientific community? Hmm...that's interesting. I'd like to see at least something about this, news article, whatever.

 

Well, I wouldn't probably go that far, only weak theroies or those based on outdated knowledge tend to fall by the wayside when evidence mounts against them or when better knowledge replaces the mistaken propositions that supported the original theory.

When you get right down to it, scientific theories form the basis for all of scientific knowledge, if they were "constantly being proven wrong", our very science itself, (including the theories that explain how your subaru works) would all be a very unstable proposition,

Ideas generally do not fall into the catagory of theory until evidence and repeatability provide a basis in fact to support the idea, before that it is merely a (an?) hypothesis.