So now that I've given you proof, you're simply choosing to ignore it. Typical.
Proof? That is what you call proof? lol
Iím only hammering you because you were hammering the Christian. If you are going to bully someone for his religious faith, be prepared to take a few shoves in the back from those who donít like bullies with lame ideas.
You see, I really am open minded and I have no fear of going to hell if I change my mind. However, you need to do more than post some articles listing psychological disorders brought about by environmental influences and get to proving this mountain you say you have or you need to accept the fact that you donít have jack and you are no better for believing what you believe than the Christian is for what he believes.
Ok, no genetic proof. We agree on that then right?
And for the record, you don't prove anything in science, you only falsify. A testable and yet unfalsifiable claim is held as empirical proof.
Last edited by CriticalThought; 05-24-11 at 12:33 AM.
If you really think you're "bullying" me, first of all it's kind of sad a grown man is that immature, but second you're doing a poor job by being consistently wrong.
Moving the goal post again, I see. You asked for "one scientist." I gave you many. I showed you why, and even how that manifests in a physically observable way. You're actually willing to deny the existence of physical traits to remain wrong.
(Re: genetics) Not at present. At the moment, birth order seems to be the determining factor. The more sons a woman has the more likely the youngest is to be gay. I don't know if that correlates for lesbian women.
The Bible on the other hand, or the so called "Word of God" holds many testable claims. For example is it possible to build a boat out of wood that could hold two of every animal on the planet? No it is not.
As far as our understanding of sexual orientation, at our current level of technology we can only rely upon self report, involuntary physiological arousal (erections and vaginal lubrication), and behavior to arbitrarily categorize people for study. From doing so, scientists have observed certain physical traits more common among those placed in the gay category than in the straight category. To the exclusion of a genetic sequence to explain them, this would suggest a set of epigenetic factors. Other studies have supported this position. In fact, one study found that people could predict a young child's future sexual orientation with startling accuracy.
So would I say there is more evidence to support the latter than the former? Yes.