OK, so maybe I was wrong...
-
I've often argued that it is rediculous to conclude that homosexuality can be attributed directly to genetic causes. That is, that such behavior cannot be caused directly by a 'gay gene' simple because any such gene would quickly select itself from the gene pool given the freedom to express itself. However, this [^] study presents a valid argument that provides a reasonable genetic mechanism for how it might occur. It would seem that the gene for male homosexuality might be associated with a gene that increases fertility in women. Now that would make some scientific sense, which is all I've ever asked for in this paticular debate. "Benedict Arnold was a war hero too."
Fair play Stan Rhys A bus station is where a bus stops. A train station is where a train stops. On my desk I have a workstation... Vampireware /n/, a project, capable of sucking the lifeblood out of anyone unfortunate enough to be assigned to it, which never actually sees the light of day, but nonetheless refuses to die.
-
I've often argued that it is rediculous to conclude that homosexuality can be attributed directly to genetic causes. That is, that such behavior cannot be caused directly by a 'gay gene' simple because any such gene would quickly select itself from the gene pool given the freedom to express itself. However, this [^] study presents a valid argument that provides a reasonable genetic mechanism for how it might occur. It would seem that the gene for male homosexuality might be associated with a gene that increases fertility in women. Now that would make some scientific sense, which is all I've ever asked for in this paticular debate. "Benedict Arnold was a war hero too."
So it comes down to simply wearing the wrong genes? :) ------- sig starts "I've heard some drivers saying, 'We're going too fast here...'. If you're not here to race, go the hell home - don't come here and grumble about going too fast. Why don't you tie a kerosene rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
-
So it comes down to simply wearing the wrong genes? :) ------- sig starts "I've heard some drivers saying, 'We're going too fast here...'. If you're not here to race, go the hell home - don't come here and grumble about going too fast. Why don't you tie a kerosene rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
It's those damned Jordache genes - too damn tight! ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned
-
Full marks from me for this display of open mindedness and intellectual honesty. John Carson
John Carson wrote: Full marks from me for this display of open mindedness and intellectual honesty. Well, lets not get too carried away. I've always been willing to accept a scientifically valid explanation for the claim that homoseuxality could be inhereted. That doens't change my political POV on the subject at all. "Benedict Arnold was a war hero too."
-
John Carson wrote: Full marks from me for this display of open mindedness and intellectual honesty. Well, lets not get too carried away. I've always been willing to accept a scientifically valid explanation for the claim that homoseuxality could be inhereted. That doens't change my political POV on the subject at all. "Benedict Arnold was a war hero too."
Stan Shannon wrote: Well, lets not get too carried away. I've always been willing to accept a scientifically valid explanation for the claim that homoseuxality could be inhereted. That doens't change my political POV on the subject at all. I wasn't thinking that your views had undergone a radical transformation. My comment stands nevertheless. To actually take the initiative in drawing attention to an argument contrary to a previously stated position is admirable. John Carson
-
So it comes down to simply wearing the wrong genes? :) ------- sig starts "I've heard some drivers saying, 'We're going too fast here...'. If you're not here to race, go the hell home - don't come here and grumble about going too fast. Why don't you tie a kerosene rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
Haven't you been paying attention? It's the skirt that does it! ;P -- Wir müssen leben bis wir sterben.
-
I've often argued that it is rediculous to conclude that homosexuality can be attributed directly to genetic causes. That is, that such behavior cannot be caused directly by a 'gay gene' simple because any such gene would quickly select itself from the gene pool given the freedom to express itself. However, this [^] study presents a valid argument that provides a reasonable genetic mechanism for how it might occur. It would seem that the gene for male homosexuality might be associated with a gene that increases fertility in women. Now that would make some scientific sense, which is all I've ever asked for in this paticular debate. "Benedict Arnold was a war hero too."
I suspect that homosexuality like many things is part of the diversity effect that seems to occur in nature to help with species survival and can have side effects - from the hero who runs into a blazing builing and dies to someone with long sight who in ealier times would make a good lookout for others. The interaction of genes can be very odd when a cell is functioning - I was at a conference on genetics once and the effect of 'false control genes' was one topic. Very interesting and it shows that the genome map is only the first step not the last. One last point - it is possible to think about how conditions could activate a genentic trait that would otherwise remain dormant. Does this make the person involved better or worse than any other ? Elaine :rose: The tigress is here :-D
-
Fair play Stan Rhys A bus station is where a bus stops. A train station is where a train stops. On my desk I have a workstation... Vampireware /n/, a project, capable of sucking the lifeblood out of anyone unfortunate enough to be assigned to it, which never actually sees the light of day, but nonetheless refuses to die.
Agreed, but tht doesn't mean I won't prod Stan with a sharp stick occasionally ;) The tigress is here :-D
-
Stan Shannon wrote: Well, lets not get too carried away. I've always been willing to accept a scientifically valid explanation for the claim that homoseuxality could be inhereted. That doens't change my political POV on the subject at all. I wasn't thinking that your views had undergone a radical transformation. My comment stands nevertheless. To actually take the initiative in drawing attention to an argument contrary to a previously stated position is admirable. John Carson
Agreed, Stan has earned a gold star here. Elaine :rose: The tigress is here :-D
-
I suspect that homosexuality like many things is part of the diversity effect that seems to occur in nature to help with species survival and can have side effects - from the hero who runs into a blazing builing and dies to someone with long sight who in ealier times would make a good lookout for others. The interaction of genes can be very odd when a cell is functioning - I was at a conference on genetics once and the effect of 'false control genes' was one topic. Very interesting and it shows that the genome map is only the first step not the last. One last point - it is possible to think about how conditions could activate a genentic trait that would otherwise remain dormant. Does this make the person involved better or worse than any other ? Elaine :rose: The tigress is here :-D
Trollslayer wrote: I suspect that homosexuality like many things is part of the diversity effect that seems to occur in nature to help with species survival and can have side effects - from the hero who runs into a blazing builing and dies to someone with long sight who in ealier times would make a good lookout for others. The interaction of genes can be very odd when a cell is functioning - I was at a conference on genetics once and the effect of 'false control genes' was one topic. Very interesting and it shows that the genome map is only the first step not the last. One last point - it is possible to think about how conditions could activate a genentic trait that would otherwise remain dormant. I pretty much disagree with that completely. That is as agregious an example of bending science to support your social/moral agenda as is creationism. A gene for homosexuality would have to possess much more obvious 'side effects' than it does in order to over come the obvious suicidcal trait of thoroughly eliminating direct reproductive tendencies. The only way such a gene could possibly survive is if it were, in fact, linked to a gene which in some other way increased the probability of a genetically viable offspring. That is precisely what this study provides. While men with this gene are less likely to reproduce, women with the gene are more likely to do so, so the affect is perfectly offset. It is a beautiful use of science to establish a greater understanding of a profound mystery - without providing support for any paticular political POV. Trollslayer wrote: Does this make the person involved better or worse than any other ? We should all be free to answer that question in our own unique ways - and to live our lives accordingly. "Benedict Arnold was a war hero too."
-
Stan Shannon wrote: Well, lets not get too carried away. I've always been willing to accept a scientifically valid explanation for the claim that homoseuxality could be inhereted. That doens't change my political POV on the subject at all. I wasn't thinking that your views had undergone a radical transformation. My comment stands nevertheless. To actually take the initiative in drawing attention to an argument contrary to a previously stated position is admirable. John Carson
John Carson wrote: My comment stands nevertheless. To actually take the initiative in drawing attention to an argument contrary to a previously stated position is admirable. Thanks for that. I always welcome the opportunity to be prooven wrong. "Benedict Arnold was a war hero too."
-
Agreed, but tht doesn't mean I won't prod Stan with a sharp stick occasionally ;) The tigress is here :-D
Careful, I prod back. ;P "Benedict Arnold was a war hero too."
