Gay genes.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-06-2015, 07:05 PM
RE: Gay genes.
(12-06-2015 07:01 PM)Gilgamesh Wrote:  Dunno'. Ask him.

Funny thing, friend. I literally did just that:
(12-06-2015 05:29 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Try though I might, I can't figure out what the point of this stupid thread is.

Enlighten me, OP?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-06-2015, 07:16 PM
RE: Gay genes.
(12-06-2015 07:05 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Try though I might, I can't figure out what the point of this stupid thread is.

Alright, I'll be more concise.

In the case of an OP containing contention, I think the point is to discuss that.

Assuming the claim(s) of the OP to be true, some might ask why the implications of it being true matter. As for that question, which is different from the first; ask the OP.

Hope this helped, and may your browsing of discussion boards be the easier for it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-06-2015, 07:40 PM
RE: Gay genes.
(12-06-2015 07:16 PM)Gilgamesh Wrote:  
(12-06-2015 07:05 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Try though I might, I can't figure out what the point of this stupid thread is.

Alright, I'll be more concise.

In the case of an OP containing contention, I think the point is to discuss that.

Assuming the claim(s) of the OP to be true, some might ask why the implications of it being true matter. As for that question, which is different from the first; ask the OP.

Hope this helped, and may your browsing of discussion boards be the easier for it.

The OP said "No gay gene has been discovered and the scientific community is split on the issue."
His statement is utterly invalid, therefore it is not true.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
12-06-2015, 07:43 PM
RE: Gay genes.
(12-06-2015 07:40 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(12-06-2015 07:16 PM)Gilgamesh Wrote:  Alright, I'll be more concise.

In the case of an OP containing contention, I think the point is to discuss that.

Assuming the claim(s) of the OP to be true, some might ask why the implications of it being true matter. As for that question, which is different from the first; ask the OP.

Hope this helped, and may your browsing of discussion boards be the easier for it.

The OP said "No gay gene has been discovered and the scientific community is split on the issue."
His statement is utterly invalid, therefore it is not true.

I have no reason to contend that, but source?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-06-2015, 07:55 PM
RE: Gay genes.
(12-06-2015 07:43 PM)Gilgamesh Wrote:  
(12-06-2015 07:40 PM)Chas Wrote:  The OP said "No gay gene has been discovered and the scientific community is split on the issue."
His statement is utterly invalid, therefore it is not true.

I have no reason to contend that, but source?

"No gay gene has been discovered" shows his ignorance of genetics and that statement renders his post meaningless.

The scientific community is not split on this non-issue. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
12-06-2015, 07:57 PM
RE: Gay genes.
(12-06-2015 07:55 PM)Chas Wrote:  "No gay gene has been discovered" shows his ignorance of genetics and that statement renders his post meaningless.
Explain. I'm not coming at this from one side or the other. I just want information.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-06-2015, 08:16 PM
RE: Gay genes.
(12-06-2015 07:57 PM)Gilgamesh Wrote:  
(12-06-2015 07:55 PM)Chas Wrote:  "No gay gene has been discovered" shows his ignorance of genetics and that statement renders his post meaningless.
Explain. I'm not coming at this from one side or the other. I just want information.

This has already been covered. There is rarely 'a gene' for anything; genetics is far more complex than that. His statement was ignorant.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
15-06-2015, 07:50 AM
RE: Gay genes.
(12-06-2015 08:16 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(12-06-2015 07:57 PM)Gilgamesh Wrote:  Explain. I'm not coming at this from one side or the other. I just want information.

This has already been covered. There is rarely 'a gene' for anything; genetics is far more complex than that. His statement was ignorant.

And: The Science Behind A More Meaningful Understanding Of Sexual Orientation

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2015, 08:41 AM
RE: Gay genes.




Somebody had to do it. Angel

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-07-2015, 09:35 PM
RE: Gay genes.
Okay, just found this thread. This Carson person is a Presidential hopeful and is guaranteed to want the Christian vote. However science has proven him wrong.

All it took was a quick search on Google.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: