 sj |
||
|
||
BS: the demise of the boring thread
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Don Firth Date: 05 May 14 - 02:45 PM It's been long known but little noted that the environment a man lives in can affect his sexual behavior, such as Ed notes above. Prisons, or in times gone by, long sea voyages with an all-male crew. But—given a choice, they resume heterosexual activity. In this kind of situation, the majority of men generally abstain, but not all. Some men seem to require an outlet—any outlet—for their libido This does NOT mean that sexual orientation is merely a matter of choice. II don't recall the exact figures right now and I don't have time to look them, but as I recall, Kinsey's 1950s study said that something like 15% of males surveyed had had homosexual relations. Some interpreted that as "15% of males are homosexual," but this was an error. Some 15% had experimented with homosexual behavior (In some cases, had been molested), but this was generally a one-time thing and in no way indicated that they had "chosen" to be homosexual. Don Firth P. S. As to Goofball, he's totally hopeless. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Dave the Gnome Date: 05 May 14 - 03:27 PM Ah - OK, Ed. That was not the link I was referring to. I posted a direct link to a Wiki page about Bailey. It is that one that disappeared. GfS. You talk so much nonsense that I doubt anyone could ever comprehend you. There is no point in even trying to address your points. There aren't any. So I will just say Gravy! No, it painted my bathroom. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Ed T Date: 05 May 14 - 03:29 PM Oops, my velcro statement was intended for the other abuse-like thread. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from, Sanity Date: 05 May 14 - 04:35 PM I'm 'hopless'??...Naw, just not susceptible to propaganda over science...which leaves spreaders of propaganda, like you, with no other recourse than to call names...BTW, STILL no definitive link...only ones that 'may suggest'...suggest all you want, but it doesn't make a fact..only create a notion....or suggestion. Dave the Gnome: "GfS. You talk so much nonsense that I doubt anyone could ever comprehend you." Interesting, most of my post was 'cut and paste' quotes from your link. Go figure. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Dave the Gnome Date: 05 May 14 - 05:03 PM most of my post was 'cut and paste' quotes from your link. The operative word being most. It was the bits around the C&P that were bollocks. If you just used C&P you may make sense. Have I already said Yang F'tang, Kipperbang? If so, I add Yingtong tiddeleye po. Gnave the dome |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Dave the Gnome Date: 05 May 14 - 05:09 PM Hint to all who are occasionally inclined to believe what they read here. Don't! :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Don Firth Date: 05 May 14 - 05:56 PM Poor Goofball. Can't tell the difference between science and propaganda (or doesn't want to) and grabs the wrong end of the stick yet again. Attempts at cross-species communication can be iffy at best. . . . Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 May 14 - 01:45 AM Where's the definitive post, Don??? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Dave the Gnome Date: 06 May 14 - 02:55 AM Ah, the sunnyglow and purimost. :D |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,McMusket Date: 06 May 14 - 05:26 AM Incense infused fruitcake. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Dave the Gnome Date: 06 May 14 - 06:23 AM The knack you are getting young Hillwalker... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 May 14 - 12:20 PM D.F.: "Poor Goofball. Can't tell the difference between science and propaganda...." (In curious, pleasant tones)...Oh really-y-y-y???? .....Is that a fact? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 May 14 - 01:20 PM Dave's link said NOTHING, except that they didn't find 'The Gene' and now they've decided to look in 'other places'............ Maybe you guys should stop trying to replace FACT with politicized speculation!!!...it's making you look like morons...AND making the thread BORING! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Don Firth Date: 06 May 14 - 01:21 PM Yes. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Don Firth Date: 06 May 14 - 01:25 PM Cross posted. My "Yes" refers to your inability (unwillingness) to acknowledge science in favor of propaganda that you find more comfortable. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 May 14 - 01:26 PM Glad you agree!!!! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 May 14 - 01:28 PM Oh!!..You found 'The Gene'????...or is it just more speculation??? Glad you found it...now put up the link! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Don Firth Date: 06 May 14 - 01:30 PM Where the hell do you get the idea that I AGREE with you? You ARE totally crackers. Any communication with you is useless. You don't even understand plain English. Goodbye! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 May 14 - 01:35 PM Again????? And while you're vacationing, maybe you can find that 'scientific fact gene'! ..because the rest of your rap is just wishful thinking on speculation...is it not? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 May 14 - 01:44 PM (It always pisses them off when they can't prove their bullshit and someone calls them on it!). GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Dave the Gnome Date: 06 May 14 - 01:54 PM You know, I think I have been more than patient. I have been referred to as a mental midget, a mutant, incapable of comprehension, indoctrinated in political and probably more, but you get the point. I have called GfS goofus and suggested that his ideas are nonsense. I think it is about time it understood how I fee,l even if it does then accuse me of resorting to invective. Goofus. You are a complete waste of everyone's time and energy. If it wasn't so funny to laugh at your feeble attempts to reason you would be ignored altogether. The world would be a much better place for your passing. Now, just fuck off and stop bothering decent people. Whinge away to your hearts content in the knowledge that this is my last post on this thread. Well done. Stay with the friends who support you (Pete? Ake? Any more?) and you will have done more to create a vile smell on Mudcat that everyone else combined. Yours sincerely. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 May 14 - 02:08 PM Oh?..Is that a FACT??....Maybe you can provide a link to prove your position as well! There are BILLIONS out there, and surely one of you Bozos could find at least ONE!..Keep in mind it has to be definitive, conclusive and from a reliable source...because if you can't, then perhaps you should re-assess your position to include just a wee bit of reality! GfS P.S. Don put you up to it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Don Firth Date: 06 May 14 - 02:24 PM Goofus, you asked for it, you GOT it! From an article in The Guardian, UK: A study of gay men in the US has found fresh evidence that male sexual orientation is influenced by genes. Scientists tested the DNA of 400 gay men and found that genes on at least two chromosomes affected whether a man was gay or straight.There is a lot more. Look them up yourself. http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/news/20050128/is-there-gay-gene http://www.livescience.com/7056-mom-genetics-produce-gay-sons.html http://vigilance.teachthefacts.org/2006/02/gay-chromosome.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xq28 Now go away and play with yourself and stop bothering the adults! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 May 14 - 02:29 PM This is a re-run....it's already been posted and found to be just another, 'we gotta' keep looking' study. Scroll back down and re-read how that 'study' got torn apart!..even by the comments from the actual link itself. Jeez, is that all you got????????????? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Don Firth Date: 06 May 14 - 02:35 PM Live on in abysmal ignorance, Goofball. Like I keep saying, there is nothing, no matter how authoritative and well-documented and researched, that you would accept because you're scared spitless of what might be in your own chromosomes. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 May 14 - 02:43 PM Here, I'll help you out, since you don't REALLY read to COMPREHEND! (Notice how many quotes from the link that are saying that they HAVEN'T found it....even from one of the guys who was in on the research!!!!). You got a short memory..this was posted yesterday.... ............................................................................. Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 05 May 14 - 02:14 PM From a 'comment', below your article, on the same page: "You clearly died pretty early on in the article as it repeatedly states that it is very clearly not all in the genes. I believe there is a comprehension gene also that occasionally goes missing, no need for a genetic test in extreme cases...." Here's some quotes from the same link of the study: "Another stretch of DNA on chromosome 8 also played a role in male sexual orientation – though again the precise mechanism is unclear." "Researchers have SPECULATED in the past that genes linked to homosexuality in men MAY have survived evolution because they happened to make women who carried them more fertile" "In follow-up work, he found that 33 out of 40 gay brothers inherited similar genetic markers on the Xq28 region of the X chromosome, SUGGESTING key genes resided there." "The gene or genes in the Xq28 region that influence sexual orientation have a limited and variable impact." "Not all of the gay men in Bailey's study inherited the same Xq28 region. The genes were neither sufficient, nor necessary, to make any of the men gay." "The flawed thinking behind a genetic test for sexual orientation is clear from studies of twins, which show that the identical twin of a gay man, who carries an exact replica of his brother's DNA, is more likely to be straight than gay. That means even a perfect genetic test that picked up every gene linked to sexual orientation would still be less effective than flipping a coin." "While genes do contribute to sexual orientation, other multiple factors play a greater role, perhaps including the levels of hormones a baby is exposed to in the womb." "We found evidence for two sets [of genes] that affect whether a man is gay or straight. But it is NOT COMPLETELY DETERMINATIVE; there are certainly OTHER environmental factors involved." "Last year, before the latest results were made public, one of Bailey's colleagues, Alan Sanders, said the findings could not and should not be used to develop a test for sexual orientation." "When people say there's a gay gene, it's an oversimplification," Sanders said. "There's more than one gene, and genetics is not the whole story. Whatever gene contributes to sexual orientation, you can think of it as much as contributing to heterosexuality as much as you can think of it contributing to homosexuality. It contributes to a variation in the trait." "This is not controversial or surprising and is nothing people should worry about. All human psychological traits are heritable, that is, they have a genetic component," he said. "Genetic factors explain 30 to 40% of the variation between people's sexual orientation. However, we don't know where these genetic factors are located in the genome. So we need to do 'gene finding' studies, like this one by Sanders, Bailey and others, to have a better idea where potential genes for sexual orientation may lie." "Steven Rose, of the Open University, said: "What worries me is not the extent, if at all, to which our genetic, epigenetic or neural constitution and development affect our sexual preferences, but the huge moral panic and RELIGIOUS and POLITICAL AGENDAS which surrounds the question." .....AND THIS ONE, which at first looks to be Bailey's position, but he did NOT take it further, which is deceptive by omission: "Sexual orientation has nothing to do with choice," said Bailey. "We found evidence for two sets [of genes] that affect whether a man is gay or straight. But it is not completely determinative; there are certainly other environmental factors involved." Other factors??? You mean the hormonal influences cause by the mother's stresses and/or resentments in the womb??? Does a mother who takes drugs (heroin, crack, cocaine, etc)during pregnancy set up the 'receptors' to cause the baby to be born with an addiction to those same substances??...The answer is a CLEAR, DEFINITIVE YES!!!!!!!!!!!! Is that 'genetic'? No, it just makes it clear that the baby is born with a 'choice-less' craving to satisfy the 'receptors' with the drug that it got accustomed to in the womb. It is the same principle. The receptors, once they get fed, not particularly from a 'substance' but rather a 'conditioned' hormone, altered by the effects of resentment/stress WILL have a DIRECT result on the baby!.......and ALL the studies, including this one, point to that direction...but, as the poster commented, on the page of the article: "You clearly died pretty early on in the article as it repeatedly states that it is very clearly not all in the genes. I believe there is a comprehension gene also that occasionally goes missing, no need for a genetic test in extreme cases...." Sorry, NO definitive, conclusive findings in this study to hang one's hat on! ...Oh, and if one can NOT change their sexual preferences, what about: Michael Glatze (born c. 1975)[1] was co-founder of Young Gay America and a former advocate for gay rights. Glatze received media coverage for publicly announcing that he no longer identified as a homosexual and denouncing homosexuality." Somehow that keeps getting ignored....it must be that, "...comprehension gene also that occasionally goes missing,..." GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Don Firth Date: 06 May 14 - 02:57 PM It is noted that you could not possibly have read the article and links that I posted because you simply didn't have enough time to read them or look them up before you posted you "rebuttal." Little point in trying to argue with someone as blatantly dishonest as you! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 May 14 - 03:01 PM We read it yesterday. ...but I'll humor you... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Don Firth Date: 06 May 14 - 03:13 PM Another lie. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST Date: 06 May 14 - 07:18 PM OK..I humored you....NOTE the CAPS!!! http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/news/20050128/is-there-gay-gene "Researchers say it's the first time the entire human genetic makeup has been scanned in search of POSSIBLE genetic determinants of male sexual orientation. The results SUGGESTS that several genetic regions MAY influence homosexuality." (Gosh, if it was all 'mapped out' you'd think someone would shout out 'Eureka!'....but they didn't...'POSSIBLE SUGGESTIONS that MAY..'...sounds more like speculative guessing, to me!..read it again). http://www.livescience.com/7056-mom-genetics-produce-gay-sons.html "Maybe everyone could use a gay uncle."(sounds already biased) "A new study found that homosexual men MAY be predisposed to nurture their nieces and nephews as a way of helping to ensure their own genes get passed down to the next generation. Research has confirmed that male homosexuality IS AT LEAST PARTLY hereditary – it TENDS to cluster in families," (This one starts off being silly!). http://vigilance.teachthefacts.org/2006/02/gay-chromosome.html "It wouldn't be right if we didn't mention this new research supporting the HYPOTHESES that sexual orientation has got a genetic component. New research adds a TWIST to the debate on the origins of sexual orientation, SUGGESTING that the genetics of mothers of multiple gay sons act differently than those of other women." (More suggestions..). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xq28 "The 1993 study by Hamer examined 114 families of gay men in the United States and found increased rates of homosexuality among maternal uncles and cousins, but not among paternal relatives. This pattern of inheritance SUGGESTED that THERE MIGHT be linked genes on the x-chromosome, since males always inherit their copy of the x-chromosome from their mothers." (SUGGESTED that there MIGHT????.....sounds pretty tentative, at best) Don to himself: "Now go away and play with yourself and stop bothering the adults!" A lot of 'MIGHTS' and 'MAYBES' and 'SUGGESTIONS'....Do you consider 'MIGHTS' and 'MAYBES' and 'SUGGESTIONS' to be definitive or conclusive???????? No wonder you guys live in a delusional fantasy world! Give us a FACT, for a change!..ummm....like 'The gene is__________'(such and such, with the definitive number)....but there isn't one... ...only 'MIGHTS' and 'MAYBES' and 'SUGGESTIONS'!!!...(but maybe even an occasional 'seems to indicate'...SUGGESTING that they MIGHT be onto something that MAY lead to another SUGGESTION of an indication...which to you dunderheads turns it into a politicized 'fact', I MAY SUGGEST...that is, from all indications....) GfS OK..You can go back to your bullshitting! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST Date: 06 May 14 - 07:20 PM I'm being blocked again... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 May 14 - 07:21 PM Testing... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 May 14 - 07:22 PM OK..It's working again.. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Don Firth Date: 06 May 14 - 07:48 PM The fact that objects, when dropped, fall toward the ground TENDS to SUGGEST that there MAY be a force called gravity. Nobody has tasted it or put it in a test tube, but rational people TEND to FEEL fairly certain that gravity exists. No thanks, Goofy, I'll leave the bullshitting to you. That, you are quite expert at. Don Firth P. S. The word "expert" comes from two Latin words: "Ex" meaning "has been" and "spurt" meaning a little drip under pressure, which seems to describe you rather well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Big Al Whittle Date: 06 May 14 - 08:44 PM Christopher Isherwood said, eventually we're all queer.... I think he was right. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 May 14 - 10:30 PM No it doesn't..it just falls. That is an observable fact...and it doesn't 'speculate', either..it just falls. Too bad about your 'theories'....but frankly, they just fall down too. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Don Firth Date: 06 May 14 - 11:00 PM Clueless. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 07 May 14 - 01:47 AM Naw...just steering away from your spins. Did you ever find the conclusive link yet?..you know, one that says 'Here it is'?...because the rest is just conjecture and assumptions...mixed with some of your favorite pastime...spinning! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 07 May 14 - 02:45 AM This one is informative: ..and one more thing, your 'gravity analogy' is off base. Gravity is measurable, to rate of pull, properties of speed, force and we know it to be there, and it can be demonstrated repeatedly. 'The Gene' hasn't even been found yet...however EVERY study, including the ones you posted, all say that there are 'other factors', AND the one that you and Dave both posted said, and I quote: "While genes do contribute to sexual orientation, OTHER MULTIPLE FACTORS PLAY A GREATER ROLE, perhaps including the levels of hormones a baby is exposed to in the womb." Greater than the genes??...Did it say that??...Didn't I tell you that over two years ago??? ..and it goes on to say(same study), "The gene or genes in the Xq28 region that influence sexual orientation have a LIMITED and VARIABLE impact." ..and then it says, (Now pay attention) "Not all of the gay men in Bailey's study inherited the same Xq28 region. The genes were NEITHER SUFFICIENT, Nor NECESSARY, to MAKE ANY of the men gay." ...and this, "That means even a perfect genetic test that picked up EVERY GENE LINKED to sexual orientation would still be LESS EFFECTIVE THAN FLIPPING A COIN." ...and this one, "...we DON'T KNOW where these genetic factors are located in the genome. So we need to do 'gene finding' studies, like this one by Sanders, Bailey and others, to have a better idea where POTENTIAL genes for sexual orientation MAY lie." ..and this,"We found evidence for two sets [of genes] that affect whether a man is gay or straight. But it IS NOT COMPLETELY DETERMINATIVE; there are certainly OTHER environmental FACTORS INVOLVED." ...and I repeat my ACCURATE commentary to that: "Other factors??? You mean the hormonal influences cause by the mother's stresses and/or resentments in the womb??? Does a mother who takes drugs (heroin, crack, cocaine, etc)during pregnancy set up the 'receptors' to cause the baby to be born with an addiction to those same substances??...The answer is a CLEAR, DEFINITIVE: YES!!!!!!!!!!!! Is that 'genetic'?: NO, it just makes it clear that the baby is born with a 'choice-less' craving to satisfy the 'receptors' with the drug that it got accustomed to in the womb. It is the same principle. The receptors, once they get fed, not particularly from a 'substance' but rather a 'conditioned' hormone, altered by the effects of resentment/stress WILL have a DIRECT result on the baby!.......and ALL the studies, including this one, point to that direction..." Now I've said that to you REPEATEDLY for YEARS now....and the studies have borne that out to be true...they can't put their finger on 'The Gene', but they've already figured out that what I've been saying IS TRUE!!! How come you can't?....I'll tell you why,..because you are trying to fit it into your political spin, and your political spin is NOT TRUE, no matter how much you WANT it to be. It's really as simple as that....AND the study I just quoted you from is from the LATEST study...and you posted it yourself!!! ..and you have the audacity to call me clueless???? You've just been spinning so much that you're dizzy beyond your common sense!...so much that you are NOT comprehending what you say or post for a link!.....(and you accuse me of 'not reading the links'??) I think that the posted link by Dave and yourself was pretty clear...so clear, that trying to spin it to mean something compatible with your 'mindset' is beyond belief!! OK...You can go back on your vacation now.... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,McMusket Date: 07 May 14 - 03:12 AM I know I have skimmed rather than tried reading Goofus's diatribe (after all, there is some wet paint to watch dry and I can't do two things at once) but nowhere do I see any acknowledgment of someone's status. Why would someone wish to be an ex gay? Other than being disturbed by the stigmatisation by nasty people, why would they see their choice of lover as a problem? Regardless of genetics versus conditioning versus choice and the rest of the smokescreen that can be used by either side of the non argument; why would someone wish to alter? More specifically, what is the agenda behind offering to help people change? I can see people dye their hair, I can see people lose weight and other changes, but their hair colour is changed, not cured. Losing weight may be a health benefit but isn't curative of anything. I am married to a slim lady with dark hair. One of my ex girlfriends was a bubbly blonde. Do you think I prayed to be cured of bubbly blondes? Sicko. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 07 May 14 - 03:32 AM Musket: "More specifically, what is the agenda behind offering to help people change?" Agenda???....How about just being truthful and NOT turning 'bad science' into political nonsense? If one subscribes to the political whims, that would mean that being tested for STD's of any sort, is being flaunted as being 'homophobic'.. AND that people who are 'reproductively challenged' (politically correct term for homosexuals) would not, could not seek counseling IF they would want it, because the political winds that are blowing don't believe that homosexuals have, or should have, or can decide not to be homosexual..therefore therapy is either denied or not available.... and those who may direct homosexuals to counseling are hated, called 'bigots', homophobes....when they are the ones who are actually helping them...IF THEY WANT IT! Agenda??...What's yours? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,McMusket Date: 07 May 14 - 04:20 AM Reproductively challenged. So, everybody who can't have children has a disability then? Does that include those who don't want children? Congratulations. You gave found a term of abuse to throw at gay people. Your bigotry blinkers causing you to cast your slur much wider. Out of interest, a gay man isn't reproductively challenged but like many heterosexual men, chooses not to have children. Although if course many adopt children anyway. You also seem to have thrown anal sex into the equation. Notwithstanding more women receive anal sex than men, you keep perpetuating the myth that STDs are a gay issue. You disgusting pervert. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 07 May 14 - 11:27 AM "...one of the things I observed in the early days - and it's still used - and that is that you take someone's argument and then you misrepresent it and misstate and disagree with it. And it's very effective. I've done it myself a number of times. But eventually, eventually people catch on." -Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, speaking at the National Press Club in Washington |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Musket Date: 07 May 14 - 11:42 AM Yes, we caught on after your second ever post. Ted Kennedy talking about misrepresenting sounds like a bridge too far.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 07 May 14 - 12:26 PM Your misrepresenting what I said, and then trying to argue your misrepresentation, as if I said it, reminds me of another bridge Kennedy was on....but then, that's a whole other subject.... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Musket Date: 07 May 14 - 05:13 PM You don't say.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Big Al Whittle Date: 07 May 14 - 06:45 PM where is this sanity place that you come from? I think you are spending too long on your own. you are thinking too much about things in a way that does not reflect the generality of human experience. its not healthy. in fact its abit scary. do you mean any harm to gay people ? if not , what is the point of all this pseudo science. if you have a real interest in genetics - enrol on a college course. scanning the internet for people that support your point of view is no substitute for education. it does involve quite a lot of hard work. if you get yourself educated and you're still of the same mind. find a regime to work for. Mengele managed it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: Don Firth Date: 07 May 14 - 09:50 PM Hey! I have a great idea! They haven't yet found the gene for "handedness" yet, so it's obviously a matter of choice, right? A left handed lifestyle! And considering the problems that left handed people cause, like at social occasions where a right handed person and a left handed person keep bumping elbows at a banquet table and things like that……. Why don't a bunch of us persecute left handed people, look on them with contempt, deny them their civil rights, and insist they be rounded up and "cured" of their perversion? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 08 May 14 - 12:54 AM Don, it doesn't look like you're very good at finding any kind of genes. You can leave that to the politicians!..Stick to chicks in clubs. Big Al: "...in fact its abit scary. do you mean any harm to gay people ? if not , what is the point of all this pseudo science." Harm to homosexuals?? Where do you get that??...as to, "...what is the point of all this pseudo science." Exactly! The interpretations of the studies has made it look like 'pseudo science', because, as you have just witnessed, right here, that though the researchers are CLEARLY saying one thing, the political spinners are trying to make it say something else completely opposite! The researchers say "Nope, haven't found the gene yet, gotta keep looking", and the politicos say, "See they found it!" Is that the kind of political people you want to trust or believe?...about this or ANYTHING???...No matter how they wrap it, with whatever 'good' intentions, they are lying through their teeth...and even got UN-knowledgeable people doing it for them...and with such vitriol and divisive hatred and angst...doesn't THAT bother you?? ....To be on the side of liars?...Shit, I'd be pissed...AND, I'd tell them to knock it off, and give you STRAIGHT INFO, not some made-up bullshit. If you let them get away with that, what else have they deceived you with???...That they are for the 'little guy' and not the corporation/mega banksters???..That they represent you, and YOUR best interests??........You know what? MY best interests lay in being told the truth, and not be stirred up emotionally over such stupid lies and spinning of the truth....Can't they trust the people who believe in them??.. and their 'cause' by giving them the truth???..and furthermore, can we trust them when they are caught repeatedly lying to those who trusted them??? What is this?..Zombies on parade?? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread From: GUEST,McMusket Date: 08 May 14 - 02:29 AM Nationally speaking Don, he's your problem not ours. |