Gay genes

by veya_victaous Tue Nov 18, 2014 9:31 pm

First topic message reminder :

New Scientist reported “the study clearly links sexual orientation in men with two regions of the human genome […] one on the X chromosome and one on chromosome 8.” However study leader Alan Sanders admits, while his work “erodes the notion that sexual orientation is a choice” there is further testing to be done.

He’s currently preparing to publish the next step in the process – “narrow[ing] down to fewer genes” – which really takes the wind out of your sales doesn’t it?

But never fear, science may be slow and painfully specific but everyone’s feeling optimistic. Neuroscientist Simon LeVay says it “knocks another nail into the coffin of the ‘chosen lifestyle’ theory of homosexuality” and, as New Scientist point out, if Sanders is able to narrow down a specific ‘gay gene’ it could have huge implications for gay rights around the world:

“The finding is an important contribution to mounting evidence that being gay is biologically determined rather than a lifestyle choice. In some countries, such as Uganda, being gay is still criminalised, and some religious groups believe that gay people can be "treated" to make them straight.”

http://www.thevine.com.au/life/news/gay-gene-suggests-people-are-born-this-way-20141118-290309/

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26572-study-of-hundreds-of-male-twins-zeroes-in-on-gay-genes.html#.VGu6M8leKtZ

Gay genes - Page 2 1481518877

by Eilzel Sun Nov 23, 2014 4:29 am

If you think that your perception is all that counts I'm afraid you are mistaken. Whatever the case, my question is why you are so forceful in pushing the point as though it were important?

by Guest Sun Nov 23, 2014 7:56 am

Why are people even pandering to Tommy, he is a first rate idiot, who is racist, xenophobic, sexist and homophobic. He will deny everything because he is that stupid, people who live by hate generally are and as seen when you prove they are, they play the denial card.
I am just thankfull there are not many other clueless people like Tommy around, as seen even when evidence is fool proof he will still deny it, showing how his thought process has been permanently damaged. People like Tommy wish to ensure that we go backwards in time to where persecution was rife.
That is all anyone ever needs to know about Tommy, where the worst part is that he is no different then to certain Islamic countries, which are backwards, of which he wishes to do the same.
Go figure

He always avoids so many questions and even worse thinks he is intelligent, which is a clear sign of insecurity, where he told me he had a high IQ.
That one had me in stitches based on his answers and views.

by eddie Sun Nov 23, 2014 10:10 am

Tommy Monk wrote:Waffle....

I said that criminals should be prevented from coming here.

At the moment criminals are able to get here too easily, unchecked.

Absolutely agree with that.

by Guest Sun Nov 23, 2014 10:18 am

eddie wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:Waffle....

I said that criminals should be prevented from coming here.

At the moment criminals are able to get here too easily, unchecked.

Absolutely agree with that.

Where he misses out most of the rest of his argument
Yes nobody wants criminals to come here Eddie, but he argues this off ethnic or groups and their crime levels as an argument to deny people coming to this country.
That is an argument steeped in fear and unfounded and irrational fear.
Xenophobic.
So do you agree that we should fear people just because they are Romanian?

Je wiz, did you not read the sign on the way in saying do not feed the animals?

by Eilzel Sun Nov 23, 2014 12:00 pm

Eds does anyone want criminals to get here easily. Its a once in a life time moment when tommy says something any sane person agrees with- don't encourage it lol

by Tommy Monk Sun Nov 23, 2014 3:12 pm

So after all the accusations against me, not one example can be posted to back up the claims.....

EU free movement allowed a convicted murderer entry to our country and Alice Gross is now dead.

by Guest Sun Nov 23, 2014 3:16 pm

Er I think it was easily proven you are xenophobic, racist, sexist and homophobic.
Denial is not a valid counter, it just proves that you have no ability to be rational.

by Tommy Monk Sun Nov 23, 2014 3:23 pm

Where's this proof you keep claiming?

All I've seen so far is SIXHIRB style accusations and put downs.....

STILL NO PROOF!!!!!

lol!

by Guest Sun Nov 23, 2014 3:25 pm

Poor that I am right.

The lol smillie.

Psychology gives everyone away Tommy and even though you have been presented with countless evidence, you are still in denial.
I would call that embarrassing on your part

by Tommy Monk Sun Nov 23, 2014 3:33 pm

Brasidas wrote:Poor that I am right.

The lol smillie.

Psychology gives everyone away Tommy and even though you have been presented without countless evidence, you are still in denial.
I would call that embarrassing on your part

"...even though you have been presented without countless evidence..."

While you are completely wrong in your 'armature' psychoanalysis of me, you give yourself away with a Freudian slip....

STILL NO EVIDENCE OF ANY OF THE ACCUSATIONS!!!

lol!

by Guest Sun Nov 23, 2014 3:34 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Brasidas wrote:Poor that I am right.

The lol smillie.

Psychology gives everyone away Tommy and even though you have been presented without countless evidence, you are still in denial.
I would call that embarrassing on your part

"...even though you have been presented without countless evidence..."

While you are completely wrong in your 'armature' psychoanalysis of me, you give yourself away with a Freudian slip....

STILL NO EVIDENCE OF ANY OF THE ACCUSATIONS!!!

Now editing words to make your argument fit Tommy?

Ha Ha
That is even worse.

by Tommy Monk Sun Nov 23, 2014 3:37 pm

No edit dodge, straight copy!!!

See you went back and corrected your post though.....

You know it as well as I do!!!

lol!

by Guest Sun Nov 23, 2014 3:39 pm

No just an edit as all can see. ha ha
Love the deflection, but all can see you edited.

This is now your defense to being exposed?

Bless you son.

Edit for Tommy to prove he tried to poorly lie.

by Tommy Monk Sun Nov 23, 2014 3:42 pm

You've been rumbled dodge....

I did a straight quote and a straight copy of your post.

You went back on it quickly and edited it!!!

And still no EVIDENCE to back up the accusations against me.

by Guest Sun Nov 23, 2014 3:44 pm

How can I edit and go back, as it shows when a poster has edited it, after others have posted?
You cannot, it shows up you have edited it, thus, the only explanation is you editing it.

Ha ha Rumbled.

by Guest Sun Nov 23, 2014 3:47 pm

I have just edited a post, my previous post to the one above, to show that Tommy is lying.

Busted

by Tommy Monk Sun Nov 23, 2014 3:53 pm

If you edit it quickly enough then it does not show up as edited.

Anyone can try this out by doing a post and then editing it within a couple of mins and they will see this is true.

I did a direct quote of Didges post and that captured his Freudian slip then he went back in and edited it quickly to correct his mistake.

Rumbled dodge!!!

by Guest Sun Nov 23, 2014 3:56 pm

So now your evidence is speculation?

Seriously, stop embarrassing yourself, the evidence points clearly to you editing son, That is the level of your desperation to be right, that you avoid all other points and now invent something to attempt to make you right.
That is hilarious and very embarrassing/

by Tommy Monk Sun Nov 23, 2014 4:06 pm

I did a direct quote of your original post dodge.

You got caught out so went back in and edited it quickly.

Anyone can do a post and if edited quickly it does not show up as edited.

And I urge anyone reading this to try it and they can see for themselves that this is true.

You have been rumbled dodge!!!

by Guest Sun Nov 23, 2014 4:09 pm

Yes please try it and see how Tommy has poorly tried to lie.
If I got caught out, the edit would show up, thus how would I be caught out, when it is not edited?
Logic is not your bag is it Tommy

Bless you mate, this is the level you now step to, when your arguments have no substance.

Tommy's defense is that I have Jedi abilities to edit my post that quickly without the editing remark after.

Yes an argument on faith is always funny and even funnier when posters like Tommy make themselves resort to such desperation.

by Tommy Monk Sun Nov 23, 2014 4:35 pm

If you make a post and then edit it quickly then the edit remark does not show up on the edited post.

Anyone can try this and see it is true!!!!

RUMBLED DODGE!!!

by Guest Sun Nov 23, 2014 4:42 pm

More speculation, and no proof.
Never seen such a poor attempt to lie by you Tommy, for fucks sake, get a grip sunshine. Your desperation her is hilarious.

by Tommy Monk Sun Nov 23, 2014 5:23 pm

I did a direct quote of your post dodge.

You edited it.

Anyone can edit their own post, and if you do it quickly enough then the edit remark does not show up.

by Guest Sun Nov 23, 2014 5:31 pm

No, as seen you edited the post.
All the evidence points to a poster desperate to deflect, which is why it is comical, as you are doing.

by Tommy Monk Sun Nov 23, 2014 5:35 pm

I did a straight quote of what you posted dodge.

You know that as well as I do.....

by eddie Sun Nov 23, 2014 8:44 pm

Brasidas wrote:
eddie wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:Waffle....

I said that criminals should be prevented from coming here.

At the moment criminals are able to get here too easily, unchecked.

Absolutely agree with that.

Where he misses out most of the rest of his argument
Yes nobody wants criminals to come here Eddie, but he argues this off ethnic or groups and their crime levels as an argument to deny people coming to this country.
That is an argument steeped in fear and unfounded and irrational fear.
Xenophobic.
So do you agree that we should fear people just because they are Romanian?

Je wiz, did you not read the sign on the way in saying do not feed the animals?

Of course i don't think we should fear someone because they're Romanian?!
I said I agreed with the sentences that he typed. And I do.

Why can't I agree with some of what he says but not the entirety?

He said he doesn't agree with criminals coming here unchecked. I agree with that.
Don't see the problem with that sentence.

by Guest Sun Nov 23, 2014 9:35 pm

eddie wrote:
Brasidas wrote:

Where he misses out most of the rest of his argument
Yes nobody wants criminals to come here Eddie, but he argues this off ethnic or groups and their crime levels as an argument to deny people coming to this country.
That is an argument steeped in fear and unfounded and irrational fear.
Xenophobic.
So do you agree that we should fear people just because they are Romanian?

Je wiz, did you not read the sign on the way in saying do not feed the animals?

Of course i don't think we should fear someone because they're Romanian?!
I said I agreed with the sentences that he typed. And I do.

Why can't I agree with some of what he says but not the entirety?

He said he doesn't agree with criminals coming here unchecked. I agree with that.
Don't see the problem with that sentence.

Because you are giving a platform to his idiotic argument and fail to see that you are when that is not even the full part of his argument,
For fucks sake
Do you always jump in just to agree with one single point failing to ignore the rest Eddie?
Stop poorly excusing his ignorance.

by Guest Sun Nov 23, 2014 9:36 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:I did a straight quote of what you posted dodge.

You know that as well as I do.....

Actually all can see you are a liar Tommy, which is no surprise from racist little weasels, when they lose arguments. So funny this

by Irn Bru Mon Nov 24, 2014 8:42 am

Irrespective or abhorrent or outdated and out of touch so many of Tommy’s views are he still has the right to a platform to air them same as everyone else on here. I’m glad he has that right because it gives people the opportunity to prove him wrong on every single measure and knock his views into the distant past where they belong.

Tommy is like so many others and probably a lost cause in accepting the arguments against his views and beliefs but people should never give up trying to convince them they are wrong.

by Eilzel Mon Nov 24, 2014 8:58 am

I don't think anyone said Tommy doesn't have a right to his view tbf Irn; we just he is wrong :-)

by Tommy Monk Mon Nov 24, 2014 12:49 pm

How am I wrong?

by Eilzel Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:06 pm

Would you listen? If anybody explained it, again? No. So why should anyone waste their time trying to dig sense out of a fossilized dinosaur?

by Tommy Monk Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:12 pm

Nobody has shown how I'm wrong even once yet.....

Just somebody saying I'm wrong and calling of racist, sexist, xenaphobe, homophobe etc does not prove anything.

lol!

by Tommy Monk Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:23 pm

We have 50% of our dna the same as a banana, over 96% with chimpanzees and 99.9% of dna with all other humans.

From The new scientist article....

Sanders stresses that complex traits such as sexual orientation depend on multiple factors, both environmental and genetic. Even if he has hit on individual genes, they will likely only have at most a small effect on their own, as has also been seen in studies of the genetic basis for intelligence, for example.

by Tommy Monk Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:31 pm

The only trait unequivocally shared by all 818 men was being gay. All other traits, such as hair colour, height and intelligence, varied by different degrees between each brothers in a pair and between all sets of brothers. Therefore, any SNPs consistently found in the same genetic locations across the group would most likely be associated with sexual orientation.

Also from The article.

And a completely false premise as we share 99.9% of dna with every other human.

And the study said only some shared these dna markers, not all.

by Guest Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:35 pm

Tommy the denialist specialist ha ha

by Tommy Monk Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:48 pm

Ok, if a group of people who snore were dna tested, would you say that any ,shared markers must be the genes responsible for snoring???

And then still cling to THis argument even though only some shared the markers????

That is what the "gay gene" study is doing.

by Guest Mon Nov 24, 2014 2:09 pm

You are now making a comparrison on snoring?
How?
There is no comparrison and hence your view point is daft.

by Tommy Monk Mon Nov 24, 2014 2:32 pm

I'm showing the massive flaw in the op claim.

by Eilzel Mon Nov 24, 2014 2:52 pm

People snore for reasons usually relating to health, so the two are incomparable- tommy monk doesn't do science very well...

by Guest Mon Nov 24, 2014 3:01 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:I'm showing the massive flaw in the op claim.

No you are trying to make a comparrison, where none exists.

by Tommy Monk Mon Nov 24, 2014 3:20 pm

It appears you two don't do science very well, the study found that only some shared the specific genes, not all.

If it was conclusive that a gene was responsible then all would have shared this gene.

And considering that we share 99.9% of genes with all other humans, the study is, in a word...... bollocks!!!

by Guest Mon Nov 24, 2014 3:42 pm

So you are now avoiding the question asked on a compqarrison to snoring when none exist.

You think all people would share all genes?

Really?

by Tommy Monk Mon Nov 24, 2014 3:53 pm

The 'scientific' study found that only some of the homosexuals shared the gene that they are claiming is responsible for homosexuality.

Surely if it was responsible for homosexuality then all those tested would exhibit this gene....

It's complete bollocks dodge.

Because on top of that, it has been found that many people share this gene regardless of sexuality.

by Guest Mon Nov 24, 2014 4:00 pm

Or that this needs more researching as it clearly states, or do you not understand that?

So I see you have dropped your idiotic claim to snoring.

by Tommy Monk Mon Nov 24, 2014 4:09 pm

The penny finally dropping I see.....

by Guest Mon Nov 24, 2014 4:29 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:The penny finally dropping I see.....

What penny, as seen you just proved it was normal by your own stupidity

by Tommy Monk Mon Nov 24, 2014 7:04 pm

Can research a, much as they like, what they proved is that this gay gene they are talking about is only shared by some gays and also shared by many non gays.

In other words, a load of bollocks!!!

by veya_victaous Mon Nov 24, 2014 9:16 pm

for starters TM your wrong about the what genes work.
the gene doesn't cause homosexuality(it isn't a on/off switch) but increases the chances of being openly homosexual.

from the Article

Sanders says he has already completed the work for that next step: he has compared SNPs in those specific regions in gay and straight men to see if there are obvious differences in the gene variants, and is now preparing the results for publication. "Through this study, we have the potential to narrow down to fewer genes," says Sanders.
Not just genetic

Whatever the results, Sanders stresses that complex traits such as sexual orientation depend on multiple factors, both environmental and genetic. Even if he has hit on individual genes, they will likely only have at most a small effect on their own, as has also been seen in studies of the genetic basis for intelligence, for example.

Notice GENES not just gene they have already identified 2 regions of the genome and 5 sets of genes.

by Tommy Monk Mon Nov 24, 2014 10:03 pm

And the genes in question were found in only some of the homosexuals and are also found in lots of everyone else too!!!!!

by Sponsored content