Teabaggers [modified]
-
Oakman wrote:
Researchers in this field, those without an agenda, believe that we are born just plain sexual
So, a researcher who believes that a tendency to homosexuality is genetically determined, has an 'agenda'? And, of course, a researcher who believes that solar activity has a greater effect on the earth's climate than does CO2 must have an 'agenda'. As must one who believes the contrary. What an 'agenda' driven world we live in.
Be dogmatic, not thoughtful. It's easier, and you get bumper stickers.- Anon.
The key word is "belief" If any researcher in any field has a belief and then selects data, or creates it wholesale, in order to "prove" his belief then he is no scientist, he is a hack. I am quite sure that there are researchers who believe that sexuality is determined genetically, and those who believe that it is determined totally by environment. The ones I think should be doing the research are the ones who don't have beliefs, simply an open mind. I, for one, have no idea, what makes someone homosexual. Equally, I have no idea whether we are actually in a period of global warming or not. I, really don't care whether someone is a homosexual, though I despise whiny little queens and butches who run around making their sexual preference the be-all and end-all of their existence. And it seems to me that if we are dealing with global warming, we need to do what we can to adapt to it rather than use it as an excuse to transfer wealth from the West to the East.
ict558 wrote:
What an 'agenda' driven world we live in.
I agree, it sucks.
“Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." ~ Albert Einstein
-
Oakman wrote:
Ravel is a queer as a three dollar bill - therefore since Michele Bachmann's husband makes his living proving to gays that it's something they can be cured of, he hates her guts.
Actually I formulated a disliking for Michele Bachmann long before I knew what her incompetent "pray-away-the-gay" quack husband did for a living. Homosexuality cannot be 'cured', and I could post many scientific journal articles supporting this, but that would be a waste of my time considering how intellectually lazy you are.
Oakman wrote:
Of course, at 17 and never having lived in the U.S., he actually knows little about American politics and less about Bachmann, but then he doesn't have to.
OK then, tell me what I am missing out on not being in such a privileged position as you are. Are there intelligent things Michele Bachmann says that miraculously never leave your country? Or do you have to be a pompous Randroid before they sound reasonable?
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
Are there intelligent things Michele Bachmann says that miraculously never leave your country
Do you actually believe that the anti-Michelle Bachmann European press, US and Australian press will report anything that is positive about her? How naive you are.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun -
The key word is "belief" If any researcher in any field has a belief and then selects data, or creates it wholesale, in order to "prove" his belief then he is no scientist, he is a hack. I am quite sure that there are researchers who believe that sexuality is determined genetically, and those who believe that it is determined totally by environment. The ones I think should be doing the research are the ones who don't have beliefs, simply an open mind. I, for one, have no idea, what makes someone homosexual. Equally, I have no idea whether we are actually in a period of global warming or not. I, really don't care whether someone is a homosexual, though I despise whiny little queens and butches who run around making their sexual preference the be-all and end-all of their existence. And it seems to me that if we are dealing with global warming, we need to do what we can to adapt to it rather than use it as an excuse to transfer wealth from the West to the East.
ict558 wrote:
What an 'agenda' driven world we live in.
I agree, it sucks.
“Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." ~ Albert Einstein
Oakman wrote:
I am quite sure that there are researchers who believe that sexuality is determined genetically,
That would be self-correcting, though, if people were honest with themselves.
Just like that old Carly Simon song... "You're so funny, You probably think this joke is about you" My Mu[sic] My Films My Windows Programs, etc.
-
Oakman wrote:
So much for your screams of girlish anguish when I addressed your post and your promises never to respond to anything I say until the end of the universe.
I've changed.
Oakman wrote:
I would welcome your pointing me to the study that proves that there is a gay gene.
Please point out where I said that there's a gay gene. Go on.
Oakman wrote:
(I'm sure that an awful lot of parents would love to be able to test for gayness in the womb in order to rectify the error before it's too late.)
That whole statement reeks of you failing genetics.
Oakman wrote:
Here's a clue: Researchers in this field, those without an agenda, believe that we are born just plain sexual - not homo or hetero. How our sex drive is channeled is a function of nurture at least as much as nature, except in very rare instances of some kind of endocrine malfunction where physiologically the subject is, in the vernacular, a chick with a dick or a stud with no pud.
Wow, you must be, like, a scientist or something. :rolleyes: Homosexuality has a genetic component. That is almost certain. Having older brothers increases the likelihood of homosexuality. There are innumerable factors contributing to it, but if there's one thing that history has shown, it's that it cannot be 'cured'.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
I said that there's a gay gene. Go on
Doesn't saying "one is born gay" imply a "gay gene"? I'm not sure if you said "born gay" or not, I haven't read all your posts, so I don't really know. But if you said something analogous to "born gay" then that would seem to also imply a "gay gene" wouldn't it?
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun -
Pete, I have never started a thread about politics here, and I never will. As far as I'm concerned the entire thread can and probably should be deleted. If I start a thread in here, it is almost always a joke. I can do all the political bashing I want to in Soapbox 1 However, I do not read the top as saying that it's OK for Brits and Aussies to indulge themselves in insults about America or American politics but we have to STFU. As Wizard pointed out, it is inhabitants of the other English-speaking countries that shoot their mouths off about America and our way of life (usually revealing an abysmal ignorance of what is actually happening over here) and start most of the threads about American politics.
“Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." ~ Albert Einstein
Oakman wrote:
Soapbox 1
I used to attend SB1 a while back, but I lost the link. Could you please email me the link? Thanks.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun -
Oakman wrote:
Soapbox 1
I used to attend SB1 a while back, but I lost the link. Could you please email me the link? Thanks.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun -
Oakman wrote:
I am quite sure that there are researchers who believe that sexuality is determined genetically,
That would be self-correcting, though, if people were honest with themselves.
Just like that old Carly Simon song... "You're so funny, You probably think this joke is about you" My Mu[sic] My Films My Windows Programs, etc.
GenJerDan wrote:
That would be self-correcting, though, if people were honest with themselves.
That's not necessarily true. There are plenty of reasonable scenarios where sporadically expressed homosexuality could be an overall benefit to a gene pool.
- F
-
http://www.codeproject.com/members/Soap-Box-1-0[^]
“Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." ~ Albert Einstein
Applied for membership. No reply yet.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun -
So much for your screams of girlish anguish when I addressed your post and your promises never to respond to anything I say until the end of the universe. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
tell me what I am missing out on not being in such a privileged position as you are
pussy. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: I would welcome your pointing me to the study that proves that there is a gay gene. (I'm sure that an awful lot of parents would love to be able to test for gayness in the womb in order to rectify the error before it's too late.) Here's a clue: Researchers in this field, those without an agenda, believe that we are born just plain sexual - not homo or hetero. How our sex drive is channeled is a function of nurture at least as much as nature, except in very rare instances of some kind of endocrine malfunction where physiologically the subject is, in the vernacular, a chick with a dick or a stud with no pud.
“Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." ~ Albert Einstein
Wow - what a pile of ignorant crap. There's no gay gene. However, sexuality IS decided in the womb. You may have been born 'sexual' and considered the pros and cons, that's called bisexual. It's not my experience, nor is what you said backed by science in any way.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
As if ANY political party is a better pick. All politicians are the same - they are only concerned about themselves as opposed to the people they're paid to represent. Oh wait... the lobby groups pay them MORE, so that's who they represent. They're all a bunch of crooks and liars, it doesn't matter where their affiliations lie...
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997Wow John, that's very impressive. I thought only Aussies had worked that one out.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
The Tea Party is stupid beyond belief; it thrives on people's singular mistrust of anybody intelligent, honest, educated, humane...
The tea party is the right on steroids, nothing more or less. So, what you said.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Wow - what a pile of ignorant crap. There's no gay gene. However, sexuality IS decided in the womb. You may have been born 'sexual' and considered the pros and cons, that's called bisexual. It's not my experience, nor is what you said backed by science in any way.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Oakman wrote:
I take it that means you have no evidence to back up your belief in this matter. I personally have no idea whether it can be or not. But then, again, I don't have an agenda. Like I said, if you ever actually come up with proof that its genetic, not how you were raised, let me know. Until then. I'm through with this thread.
-- Bailey JM and Pillard RC (1991). A genetic study of male sexual orientation. Archives of General Psychiatry, 48:1089-1096. -- Mustanski BS, et al. (2005) A genomewide scan of male sexual orientation. Human Genetics, 116(4):272-8. -- Blanchard R (1997) Birth order and sibling sex ratio in homosexual versus heterosexual males and females. Annual Review of Sexual Research, 8:27-67.
Oakman wrote:
One thing I am not is a manic-depressive gay teenager who desperately needs to believe that his IQ makes him a worthwhile human being, in spite of all the indications to the contrary.
Oakman wrote:
Do you really think your parents wouldn't have aborted you if they knew you were going to end up like you have?
It's clear that you really hate gay people. Let me guess: your son turned out gay so you disowned him.
First of all, I don't care if you're gay or not, or who is or isn't gay. I don't think it can be 'cured' or that it's a choice people make. There's no evidence for that, whatsoever. Have you read the book 'Brainsex' ? It's the first book that I can find that posited that homosexuality is not genetic, but occurs in the womb as the brain is 'sexed', the brain and body start female, and three shots of testosterone during development, make you male. These people have done experiments proving with rats that if you mess with that process, you can repeatably make homosexual mice, male and female ( depending on which shots you do and don't allow ). I've talked about this before and been shouted down, on the basis that people assume I am suggesting people test their babies to see if they are gay. As it turns out, this is probably possible, but I'm not advocating it. I'm just pointing out what the science seems to indicate. I feel like I should clarify, as Oakman is about and trying to pick a fight. 'First book I can find', means I've read this in a number of books that describe different evidence for the theory, but this is the earliest book I've read that describes it.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
modified on Tuesday, September 20, 2011 3:25 AM
-
What difference does it make to you, Christian, since you believe the baby is damned to hell unless he joins your little cult?
“Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." ~ Albert Einstein
As previously noted, you are a tosser and this forum exists solely because you like to pick fights with people to inflate your ego. As to the gist of your comment, yes, I am a Christian. My belief in an afterlife does not mean that I would have no concern for the well being of people who choose not to take part in 'my little cult' ( aka Christianity ), nor does it mean that I think I'm better than anyone else.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
_Josh_ wrote:
You don't have to be wrong
Although in this case he IS wrong about point 2: "Michelle Bachman's husband makes his living deprogramming gays." Firstly, it cannot be done, at least not as human society currently stands. Not with prayers, not with Bible passages, not with 'Christian counselling'... Secondly, since Oakman finds reality unconvincing, and since he's so comically supportive of the Bachmanns, Marcus Bachmann himself has denied that that's what they do there.
hi.............what happen..
-
Ah, what happened between us Oakman?
Nothing dear..
-
Nothing dear..
Rakesh Meel wrote:
Nothing dear..
Don't call me that.
-
Nothing dear..
-
hi.............what happen..
-
The key word is "belief" If any researcher in any field has a belief and then selects data, or creates it wholesale, in order to "prove" his belief then he is no scientist, he is a hack. I am quite sure that there are researchers who believe that sexuality is determined genetically, and those who believe that it is determined totally by environment. The ones I think should be doing the research are the ones who don't have beliefs, simply an open mind. I, for one, have no idea, what makes someone homosexual. Equally, I have no idea whether we are actually in a period of global warming or not. I, really don't care whether someone is a homosexual, though I despise whiny little queens and butches who run around making their sexual preference the be-all and end-all of their existence. And it seems to me that if we are dealing with global warming, we need to do what we can to adapt to it rather than use it as an excuse to transfer wealth from the West to the East.
ict558 wrote:
What an 'agenda' driven world we live in.
I agree, it sucks.
“Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." ~ Albert Einstein
belief: Conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some phenomenon, especially when based on the examination of evidence. open-minded: Receptive to new and different ideas or the opinions of others. These are not mutually exclusive. When I get new evidence I change my mind. What do you do? - John Maynard Keynes.
Oakman wrote:
If any researcher in any field has a belief and then selects data, or creates it wholesale, in order to "prove" his belief then he is no scientist
Scientific researchers propose hypotheses as explanations of phenomena, and design experimental studies to test these hypotheses via predictions which can be derived from them. These steps must be repeatable, to guard against [fabrication,] mistake or confusion in any particular experimenter. - Wikipaedia (My insert - Wiki thinks no evil. :) ) Thus, a researcher who selects data, or creates it wholesale, in order to 'prove' a hypothesis is not being scientific. The presence or absence of a 'belief' is immaterial. (Think Dr. Wakefield and the MMR vaccine. He was well aware that children in his study had exhibited the symptoms that he implied to vaccination before they had been vaccinated. No 'belief' there; an agenda, certainly.) Which is why the refusal to release data and methods to those who 'only wish to prove us wrong' is unscientific, and those who refuse to release them cannot be considered fully to be scientists. (The data published by Dr. Wakefield in his paper were at variance with the subjects' medical records. A first step to bringing him to justice.)
Be dogmatic, not thoughtful. It's easier, and you get bumper stickers.- Anon.