Agree Agree:  78
Likes Likes:  249
Page 4 of 93 FirstFirst 12345678142954 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 1395
  1. #46

    Re: Let's Discuss Science

    Quote Originally Posted by ponchi101 View Post
    Well, you seem to be more versed than I. I had not heard that hypothesis. I gather that the statistical analysis is out there: how many male gay offspring are the eldest?
    I am. (The youngest in my family of rearing, but that doesn't really count for this exercise.)

    My husband is the youngest of six and the third-born son, though his older brother, the third child and second son, was also likely gay.


  2. #47
    Contests
    Awards Showcase

    Woody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    4,703
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Let's Discuss Science

    Quote Originally Posted by ponchi101 View Post
    Group evolution is controversial, to say the least. I am still undecided. Dawkins if very much against it. So much he would probably write The Woody Delusion if he read your post.
    Figures it already has a name. What's the issue with it? That a mechanism for this would be difficult to achieve? I know it's a much simpler case, but I think lots of animals evolved to produce a certain ratio of male:female offspring that is more beneficial than 50:50. Is that so different?

    Actually, maybe a more reasonable mechanism is changes in utero. Similar to James' post, what if a fetus developed a particular sexual orientation based partly on the chemical signals in the environment? Like if gay males had a different pheremone makeup than straight males, this could signal mothers to produce more or fewer gay males. This would be pretty easy to test, say, by looking at the offspring of people who were adopted by gay partners. There would be no genetic link, so any differences would be environmental.

    *Sorry for theorizing only about males, I mean no offense. I tried thinking about whether this theory would extend to homosexual females, but my mind wandered...
    “I put in the work and wanted it so badly but this guy is the best for a reason. He is such a complete player ... maybe I'll just punch him or something, I don't know.” - Andy Roddick

  3. #48
    Contests
    Awards Showcase

    James7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Gaithersburg, MD
    Posts
    6,113
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Let's Discuss Science

    Can't find the number of children link to sexual orientation right at this moment (I'll look later when I have more time), but here are a couple of studies linked to this broader discussion:

    Handedness correlates roughly with sexual orientation (i.e. may be a linked or even proximal gene)

    Facial recognition tends to be better in gay men, denotes two hemisphere brain use more common in women
    I disapprove of this message

  4. #49

    Re: Let's Discuss Science

    Quote Originally Posted by Drop-shot View Post
    Ponchi, where do you get these stats from? I'd much like to use them next time I have to discuss the issue.
    Try this two:
    Biological exuberance: Animal homosexuality and Natural Diversity, by Bruce Baghemil.
    Evolution's Rainbow, by Joan Roughgarden.
    If you run into the argument of "Homosexuality is wrong because it is not natural" (and if you are in Argentina I doubt that you have escaped that idiot remark) these two pretty much dismantle the argument. Baghemil reports more than 450 species that have been documented engaging in non-reproductive sexual behavior (not necessarily homosexual). Roughgarden spent ten years documenting her book in large part because of suppression of reporting by some scientists.

    Quote Originally Posted by craighickman View Post
    I am. (The youngest in my family of rearing, but that doesn't really count for this exercise.)

    My husband is the youngest of six and the third-born son, though his older brother, the third child and second son, was also likely gay.
    Would you guys find it sensitive if we ran that poll here at TAT? We are not a scientific community, but maybe it would bring a little light on the subject (and Woody can share his Noble prize with all of us).
    ---
    Group Evolution. The opponents are simply camping out for one reason: how do you explain group evolution when there are no Group Genes? It is a basic statement, but it cuts right through the claims. The debate is heated, from what I have read.
    Last edited by ponchi101; 02-04-2011 at 01:49 PM.
    Missing winter...

  5. #50
    Contests
    Awards Showcase

    Woody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    4,703
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Let's Discuss Science

    Quote Originally Posted by ponchi101 View Post
    (and Woody can share his Noble prize with all of us)
    Is that what they gave to Pierre Janssen for discovering helium?

    A helium atom floats into a bar. The bartender says "Hey! We don't serve noble gases in here!" The helium doesn't react.
    “I put in the work and wanted it so badly but this guy is the best for a reason. He is such a complete player ... maybe I'll just punch him or something, I don't know.” - Andy Roddick

  6. #51

    Re: Let's Discuss Science

    Quote Originally Posted by Woody View Post
    Figures it already has a name. What's the issue with it? That a mechanism for this would be difficult to achieve? I know it's a much simpler case, but I think lots of animals evolved to produce a certain ratio of male:female offspring that is more beneficial than 50:50. Is that so different?

    Actually, maybe a more reasonable mechanism is changes in utero. Similar to James' post, what if a fetus developed a particular sexual orientation based partly on the chemical signals in the environment? Like if gay males had a different pheremone makeup than straight males, this could signal mothers to produce more or fewer gay males. This would be pretty easy to test, say, by looking at the offspring of people who were adopted by gay partners. There would be no genetic link, so any differences would be environmental.

    *Sorry for theorizing only about males, I mean no offense. I tried thinking about whether this theory would extend to homosexual females, but my mind wandered...
    The study that linked the number of male children to homosexuality theorized that a woman's body treats a male fetus as a foreign object and with each successive male fetus develops stronger "anti-bodies" which "attacks" the fetus and in some way alters the sexual orientation of the fetus.
    Towel Avatar, do your thing!

  7. #52

    Re: Let's Discuss Science

    Quote Originally Posted by Miles View Post
    The study that linked the number of male children to homosexuality theorized that a woman's body treats a male fetus as a foreign object and with each successive male fetus develops stronger "anti-bodies" which "attacks" the fetus and in some way alters the sexual orientation of the fetus.
    Found the story as it was reported on 60 minutes -- it appears toward the end.

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...89607318034090#
    Towel Avatar, do your thing!

  8. #53
    Contests
    Awards Showcase

    James7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Gaithersburg, MD
    Posts
    6,113
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Let's Discuss Science

    Quote Originally Posted by Woody View Post
    Is that what they gave to Pierre Janssen for discovering helium?

    A helium atom floats into a bar. The bartender says "Hey! We don't serve noble gases in here!" The helium doesn't react.
    I disapprove of this message

  9. #54
    Senior Staff
    Forum Moderator

    Awards Showcase

    Scotty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alameda, CA
    Posts
    11,881
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Let's Discuss Science

    Quote Originally Posted by ponchi101 View Post

    Would you guys find it sensitive if we ran that poll here at TAT? We are not a scientific community, but maybe it would bring a little light on the subject (and Woody can share his Noble prize with all of us).
    Oldest, and only, son here.

    I thought there was once a study of twins that showed that if one was gay, the likelihood that the 2nd twin would also be gay was MUCH higher than that of a non-twin sibling. No idea if it has since been discredited, or a better study has been conducted.

  10. #55

    Re: Let's Discuss Science

    Quote Originally Posted by Woody View Post
    Is that what they gave to Pierre Janssen for discovering helium?

    A helium atom floats into a bar. The bartender says "Hey! We don't serve noble gases in here!" The helium doesn't react.
    Damn! I need a SMART spell check. Silly me.
    My GF still does not understand the helium joke. She is asking to please get a beer and watch TV.
    About the poll. I did not mean here, guys. I meant a separate thread (I am curious now. The few answers are pointing the other way)
    Missing winter...

  11. #56

    Re: Let's Discuss Science

    Quote Originally Posted by ponchi101 View Post
    If you run into the argument of "Homosexuality is wrong because it is not natural" (and if you are in Argentina I doubt that you have escaped that idiot remark) these two pretty much dismantle the argument. Baghemil reports more than 450 species that have been documented engaging in non-reproductive sexual behavior (not necessarily homosexual). Roughgarden spent ten years documenting her book in large part because of suppression of reporting by some scientists.
    .
    I always say that it is natural in my discussion but have no sources to quote, so this will come in handy.
    Meet again we do, old foe...

  12. #57

    Re: Let's Discuss Science

    Couple thoughts that came into my mind while reading the latest discussion...

    It seems reasonable to assume that whatever causes homosexuality happens either at conception or during the pregnancy. No one has found a homosexuality gene and not for the lack of trying.

    Any theory that explains the male homosexuality should be able to do the same for the female form. Are there actually more gays than lesbians? Seems so reading this board, but that isn't exactly scientific...
    Roger forever

  13. #58
    Contests
    Awards Showcase

    Woody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    4,703
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Let's Discuss Science

    Quote Originally Posted by suliso View Post
    Any theory that explains the male homosexuality should be able to do the same for the female form. Are there actually more gays than lesbians? Seems so reading this board, but that isn't exactly scientific...
    I think it's very tough to compare the two. If you subscribe to the "sliding scale" theory of sexuality, then you have to somehow compensate for the fact that society often encourages gay men to stay closeted while it encourages (and often celebrates) "straightish" women to experiment. Not that there's anything wrong with the latter
    “I put in the work and wanted it so badly but this guy is the best for a reason. He is such a complete player ... maybe I'll just punch him or something, I don't know.” - Andy Roddick

  14. #59

    Re: Let's Discuss Science

    Quote Originally Posted by Woody View Post
    I think it's very tough to compare the two. If you subscribe to the "sliding scale" theory of sexuality, then you have to somehow compensate for the fact that society often encourages gay men to stay closeted while it encourages (and often celebrates) "straightish" women to experiment.
    There are plenty of men who go both ways... Wasn't there a scandal recently with a US senator (married and with children) being caught soliciting for gay sex?
    Roger forever

  15. #60
    Head Cheese
    Awards Showcase

    Kirkus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    37,658
    Blog Entries
    10

    Re: Let's Discuss Science

    I'm the youngest of five. 3 boys, 2 girls.
    Oh Grigor. You silly man.

Page 4 of 93 FirstFirst 12345678142954 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •