America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 4 years ago by victor809. 50 replies replies.
In the largest study of its kind
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
tailgater Offline
#1 Posted: Fri, Aug 30 2019, 10:57 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
It has been determined there is not any such thing as "gay genes".


Although an argument could be made for circa 1980's Lee and Calvin Klein.
RMAN4443 Offline
#2 Posted: Fri, Aug 30 2019, 4:35 PM EST
Joined: 09-29-2016
Posts: 7,683
tailgater wrote:
It has been determined there is not any such thing as "gay genes".


Although an argument could be made for circa 1980's Lee and Calvin Klein.

Now we don our gay apparel, fa la la, la la la, la la la......Think
victor809 Offline
#3 Posted: Fri, Aug 30 2019, 4:56 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Not sure if you're trolling or just read a really really bad summary of that study.... but you know the results are pretty much the opposite of what you just said, right?
Whistlebritches Offline
#4 Posted: Fri, Aug 30 2019, 5:04 PM EST
Joined: 04-23-2006
Posts: 22,128
victor809 wrote:
Not sure if you're trolling or just read a really really bad summary of that study.... but you know the results are pretty much the opposite of what you just said, right?



I suppose you can make up your own screwed up conclusions...…...but it says there is no such animal as a gay gene.In other words gay is a choice...….always has been,always will be


But seriously the only people who care anymore are those who claim to be gay.Why……….hell if I know???
Speyside Offline
#5 Posted: Fri, Aug 30 2019, 5:06 PM EST
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Interesting, but I see three problems with this study, if one can even call it that. There is an age bias, the average respondent was 51 or older. The respondent group was primarily European and North American. This focused on genetics only. Neuro Physiology was not included. Though based on what I read in Scientific American does support what Tail said.
victor809 Offline
#6 Posted: Fri, Aug 30 2019, 5:13 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Speyside wrote:
Interesting, but I see three problems with this study, if one can even call it that. There is an age bias, the average respondent was 51 or older. The respondent group was primarily European and North American. This focused on genetics only. Neuro Physiology was not included. Though based on what I read in Scientific American does support what Tail said.


Nah. I'm not particularly worried about the lack of neurophysiology... the age of the respondents (and resulting social factors) is an issue....

But what's funniest when you read the actual article, it says the opposite of the headline. It really lets you see who reads and who doesn't.

Study author quoted as saying: "There is no ‘gay gene’" becomes the headline.
Actual Article: "Same-sex sexual behavior is influenced by not one or a few genes but many."
victor809 Offline
#7 Posted: Fri, Aug 30 2019, 5:14 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Link to actual study, only for people who know the term "phenotypic". Sorry tail... we'll get you a coloring book version in a few months.

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/365/6456/eaat7693
Speyside Offline
#8 Posted: Fri, Aug 30 2019, 5:54 PM EST
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Certainly far more study needs done. Though my thoughts have always been that the genetics effect brain function which a statistical study will never support. The many genes statement is a supposition, while probably true the statistical analysis offers so proof of this. In truth it offers no proof of anything.
victor809 Offline
#9 Posted: Fri, Aug 30 2019, 6:00 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
They showed statistical correlation with I think 4 genes if I recall... But that these did not account for the entirety of the sample... But that doesn't get you causation, just correlation.

The genes specifically were tied to hormonal production if I remember.

None of this is going to prove anything definitively until we knock out genes in embryos and create gay children in a laboratory setting...
Speyside Offline
#10 Posted: Fri, Aug 30 2019, 10:23 PM EST
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Yes, but that only accounted for 1% of the studied group if I remember correctly. That could easily be a statistical anomaly or statistically irrelevant. I believe the researchers stated something to that effect. The large study was no more than a set of a few questions asked by 23 and me. This is completely worthless. The actual study you are referring to brought up some interesting questions for further study, but reached no specific conclusions. I will go back and reread to see if I missed something.
frankj1 Offline
#11 Posted: Fri, Aug 30 2019, 10:25 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
why bother. People who are gay know it.
tailgater Offline
#12 Posted: Fri, Aug 30 2019, 10:26 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Every time the word "gay" is mentioned, victor's radar goes up and he accuses people of trolling.

I used the recent news as the setup for a bad punchline.
Gay genes. Gay Jeans. Calvin Klein and Lee? Get it?
Maybe you're too young, but in my defense I did define the decade.


As for the news itself?
I get a daily news feed called 1440.
Here is a C&P from today:

A "Gay Gene".
There isn't one, according to the results of one of the most definitive studies exploring the genetic basis of human sexuality to date. The massive study examined genetic profiles of over 470,000 individuals, concluding while those with self-reported same-sex preferences differed from heterosexual participants, there was no single gene responsible for the trait (full paper here). Instead, thousands of variations across the genome contributed to overall sexual orientation. Moreover, the study estimated genetics only accounted for between 8% and 25% in determining sexual preferences - not enough to predict a person's orientation - with the majority contribution coming from non-genetic factors, including environmental, physiological, and other influences. The authors were quick to emphasize the study makes no definitive statement on the degree to which nature or nurture play a role in human sexuality, noting both are likely to have a significant influence.


So.
If this is incorrect, fine.
If it's spot on, fine.
If the study never happened, again fine.

No trolls were harmed in the typing of these posts.
tailgater Offline
#13 Posted: Fri, Aug 30 2019, 10:32 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
Link to actual study, only for people who know the term "phenotypic". Sorry tail... we'll get you a coloring book version in a few months.

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/365/6456/eaat7693


The biggest difference between Victor and Tailgater isn't our ability to comprehend science thingies.

It's your insistence to try to prove it on a daily basis.

I'm flattered that you need my approval.
I only wish I could reciprocate that urge, but alas my indifference prevents it.
izonfire Offline
#14 Posted: Sat, Aug 31 2019, 12:35 PM EST
Joined: 12-09-2013
Posts: 8,647
tailgater wrote:
I only wish I could reciprocate that urge, but alas my indifference prevents it.


But your wish reveals that you are, in fact, not indifferent.

Sergio Valentes. Now those were some gay jeans...
But those jeans on women? Ooh la la...
Speyside Offline
#15 Posted: Sat, Aug 31 2019, 12:45 PM EST
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Tail, since when did a small group of small questions become a study? Also, there was no scientific method used. Maybe they are correct, maybe they aren't. Their form proved nothing. Read up on scientific method and study methodology. This was not following any accepted standard protocols. Simply put the information gathered is unsubstantiated, and has no real use.
delta1 Offline
#16 Posted: Sat, Aug 31 2019, 3:59 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
well.....it WAS the largest study of its kind....

Jordache were the gayest, tho...
Phil222 Offline
#17 Posted: Sat, Aug 31 2019, 4:20 PM EST
Joined: 10-01-2017
Posts: 1,911
lol @ Jordache. Ed Hardy are pretty gay too.
Whistlebritches Offline
#18 Posted: Sat, Aug 31 2019, 5:08 PM EST
Joined: 04-23-2006
Posts: 22,128
Any **** ing jeans that aren't relaxed fit boot cut are gay
izonfire Offline
#19 Posted: Sat, Aug 31 2019, 5:28 PM EST
Joined: 12-09-2013
Posts: 8,647
Whistlebritches wrote:
Any **** ing jeans that aren't relaxed fit boot cut are gay


What about relaxed fit boot cut jeans with a hole in the seat?
victor809 Offline
#20 Posted: Sat, Aug 31 2019, 6:45 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Nah tail... You just can't help yourself but be a troll.

To be fair, my problem with this had nothing to do with "gay". It was the complete misrepresentation of a scientific study. Your summary, provided by your news feed does not seem to be an accurate representation of the study (I need to look at them side by side, I'm working from memory)... So perhaps you should choose a different feed?

With a completely inaccurate representation of the study, your joke ends up falling flat ... You know... Because it's referencing an inaccurate statement....

...if our difference were not an ability to comprehend science, then I would expect you to be more accurate....
pacman357 Offline
#21 Posted: Sat, Aug 31 2019, 7:44 PM EST
Joined: 02-27-2006
Posts: 42,596
One thing is certain. If there is any place where the nature vs. choice debate on sexuality will be resolved, it will almost certainly be done here, and in conclusive and decisive fashion. I look forward to resolution of this issue here any moment now.
DrafterX Offline
#22 Posted: Sat, Aug 31 2019, 8:26 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
Ya, Victor's pretty anal about gay-homoism stuff... Mellow
izonfire Offline
#23 Posted: Sat, Aug 31 2019, 8:37 PM EST
Joined: 12-09-2013
Posts: 8,647
pacman357 wrote:
One thing is certain. If there is any place where the nature vs. choice debate on sexuality will be resolved, it will almost certainly be done here, and in conclusive and decisive fashion. I look forward to resolution of this issue here any moment now.


Well, let’s get this thing hammered out then.
Don’t wanna keep ya waitin’...
frankj1 Offline
#24 Posted: Sat, Aug 31 2019, 8:51 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
I choose nature.
Phil222 Offline
#25 Posted: Sat, Aug 31 2019, 9:52 PM EST
Joined: 10-01-2017
Posts: 1,911
My hypothesis has to do with epigenetic jean regulation. Jordache may have some gay jeans, but the influence of those jeans on the person who wears them is dependent upon a multitude of environmental factors. Bring on the Jordache twin studies and let's settle this thing.
frankj1 Offline
#26 Posted: Sat, Aug 31 2019, 9:59 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
Phil222 wrote:
My hypothesis has to do with epigenetic jean regulation. Jordache may have some gay jeans, but the influence of those jeans on the person who wears them is dependent upon a multitude of environmental factors. Bring on the Jordache twin studies and let's settle this thing.

more in the spirit of the OP, thanks.
RMAN4443 Offline
#27 Posted: Sat, Aug 31 2019, 10:46 PM EST
Joined: 09-29-2016
Posts: 7,683
victor809 wrote:
Nah tail... You just can't help yourself but be a troll.

To be fair, my problem with this had nothing to do with "gay". It was the complete misrepresentation of a scientific study. Your summary, provided by your news feed does not seem to be an accurate representation of the study (I need to look at them side by side, I'm working from memory)... So perhaps you should choose a different feed?

With a completely inaccurate representation of the study, your joke ends up falling flat ... You know... Because it's referencing an inaccurate statement....

...if our difference were not an ability to comprehend science, then I would expect you to be more accurate....


I thought it was funny.....Anxious


DrafterX wrote:
Ya, Victor's pretty anal about gay-homoism stuff... Mellow


Drafter said anal gay-homoism stuff.....Laugh
izonfire Offline
#28 Posted: Sat, Aug 31 2019, 10:49 PM EST
Joined: 12-09-2013
Posts: 8,647
Phil222 wrote:
My hypothesis has to do with epigenetic jean regulation. Jordache may have some gay jeans, but the influence of those jeans on the person who wears them is dependent upon a multitude of environmental factors. Bring on the Jordache twin studies and let's settle this thing.


OK. That confirms it. Jordache - totally gay
tailgater Offline
#29 Posted: Sun, Sep 1 2019, 9:20 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Speyside wrote:
Tail, since when did a small group of small questions become a study? Also, there was no scientific method used. Maybe they are correct, maybe they aren't. Their form proved nothing. Read up on scientific method and study methodology. This was not following any accepted standard protocols. Simply put the information gathered is unsubstantiated, and has no real use.


Holy crap you're stupid.
tailgater Offline
#30 Posted: Sun, Sep 1 2019, 9:27 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Look.
If you don't like the jeans joke, fine.
If you don't get it, OK.
But to morph this into a debate about the pseudo study is an exercise in stupidity. Especially since I've explained it already.
Talk about trolls.
tailgater Offline
#31 Posted: Sun, Sep 1 2019, 9:32 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Speyside wrote:
Tail, since when did a small group of small questions become a study? Also, there was no scientific method used. Maybe they are correct, maybe they aren't. Their form proved nothing. Read up on scientific method and study methodology. This was not following any accepted standard protocols. Simply put the information gathered is unsubstantiated, and has no real use.


This is priceless.

I mock victor for being a douche for trying too hard to sound sciency.

Then Speyside posts the above.


And I'm the bad guy for calling him victor's puppet.

Maybe "victor's echo" is more accurate.


Either way: LOL!
streetrod Offline
#32 Posted: Thu, Sep 5 2019, 5:28 PM EST
Joined: 08-16-2007
Posts: 2,110
Geez, i can’t believe I got TG’s humor with the first post.
Can’t believe nobody mentioned Z Cavaricci jeans!
m j toal Offline
#33 Posted: Thu, Sep 5 2019, 6:11 PM EST
Joined: 03-06-2009
Posts: 3,226
tailgater wrote:
Every time the word "gay" is mentioned, victor's radar goes up and he accuses people of trolling.

I used the recent news as the setup for a bad punchline.
Gay genes. Gay Jeans. Calvin Klein and Lee? Get it?
Maybe you're too young, but in my defense I did define the decade.


As for the news itself?
I get a daily news feed called 1440.
Here is a C&P from today:

A "Gay Gene".
There isn't one, according to the results of one of the most definitive studies exploring the genetic basis of human sexuality to date. The massive study examined genetic profiles of over 470,000 individuals, concluding while those with self-reported same-sex preferences differed from heterosexual participants, there was no single gene responsible for the trait (full paper here). Instead, thousands of variations across the genome contributed to overall sexual orientation. Moreover, the study estimated genetics only accounted for between 8% and 25% in determining sexual preferences - not enough to predict a person's orientation - with the majority contribution coming from non-genetic factors, including environmental, physiological, and other influences. The authors were quick to emphasize the study makes no definitive statement on the degree to which nature or nurture play a role in human sexuality, noting both are likely to have a significant influence.


So.
If this is incorrect, fine.
If it's spot on, fine.
If the study never happened, again fine.

No trolls were harmed in the typing of these posts.



I see you used a very small bait to catch your fish... or a... tadpole.
Whistlebritches Offline
#34 Posted: Thu, Sep 5 2019, 6:33 PM EST
Joined: 04-23-2006
Posts: 22,128
izonfire wrote:
What about relaxed fit boot cut jeans with a hole in the seat?



Those are called "Z" cut jeans...…..I hear they're quite popular in Oregon
Buckwheat Offline
#35 Posted: Fri, Sep 6 2019, 10:43 AM EST
Joined: 04-15-2004
Posts: 12,251
In a related news; they've identified genetic markers for left handedness.
https://www.livescience.com/left-handed-genes.html

Time to rid the world of this terrible curse before they take our jobs away. Think of the children!! Beer Sarcasm
delta1 Offline
#36 Posted: Fri, Sep 6 2019, 12:39 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
I saw that Buckwheat...venture to guess who among us is a southpaw?
izonfire Offline
#37 Posted: Fri, Sep 6 2019, 1:14 PM EST
Joined: 12-09-2013
Posts: 8,647
streetrod wrote:
Geez, i can’t believe I got TG’s humor with the first post.
Can’t believe nobody mentioned Z Cavaricci jeans!


Those are over-the-top gay Streetrod.
Better left unmentioned. Only so much gay we can handle...
izonfire Offline
#38 Posted: Fri, Sep 6 2019, 1:16 PM EST
Joined: 12-09-2013
Posts: 8,647
Whistlebritches wrote:
Those are called "Z" cut jeans...…..I hear they're quite popular in Oregon


Were they made for drillin'?
tailgater Offline
#39 Posted: Fri, Sep 6 2019, 8:30 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
streetrod wrote:
Geez, i can’t believe I got TG’s humor with the first post.
Can’t believe nobody mentioned Z Cavaricci jeans!


Of course you got it.
I dumbed it down for giants fans.
And I never heard of those jeans. Must be a Jersey thing.


And I might be heading to the meadowlands for the Jets game.
Would be good to see you again if we do.
CelticBomber Offline
#40 Posted: Fri, Sep 6 2019, 9:30 PM EST
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,786
Whistlebritches wrote:
I suppose you can make up your own screwed up conclusions...…...but it says there is no such animal as a gay gene.In other words gay is a choice...….always has been,always will be


But seriously the only people who care anymore are those who claim to be gay.Why……….hell if I know???


You can't honestly think that just because they didn't find a gene it must be a choice? Every single one of us starts out female at conception. The Y chromosome then triggers certain hormones to be released and tada you get a baby boy. It could be caused by any number of physiological reasons. Besides that, you can't take one single study at face value for anything. They've released their results now it has to be corroborated by others. We have no way of knowing how they came to that conclusion until they release all of their research, not just their results and others can pour through it to see if they come to the same conclusion. Then more studies to see if those studies come to the same conclusion.

Look at what happened last year. Study after study saying statin drugs like Lipitor can lower your risk of heart disease by 36%. Turns out almost all of those studies took money from Pfizer and manipulated the results. Statin drugs are the most over prescribed drugs in the world. After years of legal battles and changing laws to get these studies to release their raw data not one truly independent researcher came to the same conclusions using the companies own raw data. Turns out that at best, taking a statin provided a 1% benefit vs all of the side effects. 1%.... take in to account the margin of error and it could be that statin drugs do nothing or in some cases make things worse. But, that can't be true right? A study said so.
frankj1 Offline
#41 Posted: Sat, Sep 7 2019, 11:25 AM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
I thought this was The Fashion thread?
Whistlebritches Offline
#42 Posted: Sat, Sep 7 2019, 11:37 AM EST
Joined: 04-23-2006
Posts: 22,128
CelticBomber wrote:
You can't honestly think that just because they didn't find a gene it must be a choice? Every single one of us starts out female at conception. The Y chromosome then triggers certain hormones to be released and tada you get a baby boy. It could be caused by any number of physiological reasons. Besides that, you can't take one single study at face value for anything. They've released their results now it has to be corroborated by others. We have no way of knowing how they came to that conclusion until they release all of their research, not just their results and others can pour through it to see if they come to the same conclusion. Then more studies to see if those studies come to the same conclusion.

Look at what happened last year. Study after study saying statin drugs like Lipitor can lower your risk of heart disease by 36%. Turns out almost all of those studies took money from Pfizer and manipulated the results. Statin drugs are the most over prescribed drugs in the world. After years of legal battles and changing laws to get these studies to release their raw data not one truly independent researcher came to the same conclusions using the companies own raw data. Turns out that at best, taking a statin provided a 1% benefit vs all of the side effects. 1%.... take in to account the margin of error and it could be that statin drugs do nothing or in some cases make things worse. But, that can't be true right? A study said so.



I went a little over the top as per usual on any gay thread to draw out Victor.However I do believe it's a combination of choice and mental illness,more MI and less choice in the transgender arena.But I will say as long as no one pushes their agenda on me I could care less,just don't ask for special rights and protections under the law.
Whistlebritches Offline
#43 Posted: Sat, Sep 7 2019, 11:41 AM EST
Joined: 04-23-2006
Posts: 22,128
frankj1 wrote:
I thought this was The Fashion thread?



Frank I can see you as a fashionista in your culottes and half shirtWink
frankj1 Offline
#44 Posted: Sat, Sep 7 2019, 11:45 AM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
Whistlebritches wrote:
Frank I can see you as a fashionista in your culottes and half shirtWink

exactly what do you mean you can see me?
that was either a freaky guess or you have a camera in my walk-in closet!
Whistlebritches Offline
#45 Posted: Sat, Sep 7 2019, 1:14 PM EST
Joined: 04-23-2006
Posts: 22,128
frankj1 wrote:
exactly what do you mean you can see me?
that was either a freaky guess or you have a camera in my walk-in closet!



I knew that damn camera was a bad idea...…..but you know Z,he gotta look
frankj1 Offline
#46 Posted: Sat, Sep 7 2019, 1:16 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
HA!
really needed a good laugh.
victor809 Offline
#47 Posted: Sat, Sep 7 2019, 2:19 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
frankj1 wrote:
I thought this was The Fashion thread?


I'm pretty sure not a single thread on this forum is the"fashion thread".

And yes.... I'm including jespears post.
tailgater Offline
#48 Posted: Sun, Sep 8 2019, 9:55 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
I'm pretty sure not a single thread on this forum is the"fashion thread".


Then how come I look so damn good?
bgz Offline
#49 Posted: Mon, Sep 9 2019, 9:35 AM EST
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
It's a choice... always been a choice.

When walking down the street and you see someone, there's only 3 natural choices...

Run from it, fight it or f*ck it.
victor809 Offline
#50 Posted: Mon, Sep 9 2019, 10:01 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
Then how come I look so damn good?



....


....



....


I mean...

....


....


I guess??

...
...
...
...
....

You're trying for the "Manatee on the boardwalk" look right?


.... I guess it's ok? If I look at you from the right.... and maybe if the sun is behind you....
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Back to Top