There are now 321 related news stories with ever evolving ever more conclusive and definitive pro-homosexual agenda headlines on google heralding this "study" -much similar to the fanfare that homosexual agenda activists and the MSM leftist mouth peices gave the recently reported "Lesbian Brain" study that was later almost silently corrected without any fanfare...
Well, this is the third article on this study and its "suggestion" conclusion implied as definitive (versus statiscally significant scientific conclusion) that I note posted on FR (no need to post all 321 as posting junk science repeatedly does not make it more credible):
In this study the magical "fraternal birth order effect" raises its head again -another psychological theory without ANY physical biological proof premising it.
Considering the elite psychological community has declared the homosexual disorder normal without ANY scientific basis one must wonder why this purely psychological theory premised in subjective declarations exists let alone is pursued by psychologists seeking physical biological causes YET to be found? One must also wonder why other behavioral disorders attributed to the "fraternal birth order effect" seem to get published less frequently?
The cause(s) of the fraternal birth order effect in male homosexuality.James WH.
The Galton Laboratory, University College London, Wolfson House, 4 Stephenson Way, London NW1 2HE.
It has been established that the probability that a man is homosexual is positively related to his number of older brothers, but not older sisters when the brothers are accounted for. This is known as the 'fraternal birth order' effect. In the past, efforts have been made to explain this phenomenon in terms of several alternative biological hypotheses and a psychosocial hypothesis. This note examines how well these hypotheses accommodate the fraternal birth order effect. It is concluded that: (1) the evidence for the hypothesis of maternal immunoreactivity to the male fetus is weak; (2) the evidence for the intrauterine hormone exposure hypothesis is also weak; (3) the evidence for the hypothesis of postnatal learning is stronger. Lastly, there seem likely to be causes common to male homosexuality and paedophilia. They may include sexual (or quasi-sexual) experience in childhood or adolescence.
PMID: 14989531 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
-some other interesting observations attributed to the "fraternal birth order effect":
hahahaha, more homosexual agenda lunacy is proposed for my entertainment and pleasure.
They can't explain why Ellen Degenerates girlfriends keep switching sides. Not that anybody can.
Balderdash. Science with an agenda.
As the Brits themselves say, "Rubbish".
I used to believe that being homosexual might have had some genetic component. I saw the two main researchers on TV being interviewed around 1992. They were both obviously gay and had their own agenda. I have since believed that it is simply another personality disorder. Sadly, the American Association of Psychologists believes it is another 'variation' on normal. My question is 'what's normal about it?'.
I used to believe that being homosexual might have had some genetic component. I saw the two main researchers on TV being interviewed around 1992. They were both obviously gay and had their own agenda. I have since believed that it is simply another personality disorder. Sadly, the American Association of Psychologists believes it is another 'variation' on normal. My question is 'what's normal about it?'.
But, hey, got the guy grant monies, right?
In other words, Professor Bogaert thinks hetrosexual males are a disease.
As usual with these "pro-gay" studies, the sample size is WAY too small. 5% of the 944 is 48. That means that the difference between 3-5% is only 19 individuals with the sample size they used. The study could have easily fluctuated a few percentage points due to random luck.
Also, there are other possible explanations that could explain the data. They are taking quite a logical leap in claiming these results support their hypothesis that homosexuality originates in the womb.
ping
It is amazing the pretzels human beings will twist themselves into to make okay and normal that which is sin and rebellion against God.
God does not call a behavior an abomination then create people to practice the abomination.
And it doesn't matter how many "studies" men do to justify their own base, disgusting perversion, it is still an abomination in the eyes of God and will still be an abomination when the people who engage in the behavior come to the end of their lives and then have to stand before Him.
One MORE study that may or may NOT (but shows evidence) that being gay is natural? How many is that in the past 20-30 years?
Bahhhhh-loney!
It stands to reason that if there are genetic markers, then there can be genetic testing. It also stands to reason that many high-brow liberals who think it's swell that other people have gay babies wouldn't want to be bothered with a gay baby of their own, so . . .
Thanks to Roe v. Wade, mothers can cure homosexuality then, by aborting the third or fourth boy. No problemo. I'm sure the homosexual lobby understands "freedom of choice".
I rather doubt that this theory will hold up, since I know very few families these days with that many children. I suppose we should see a drastic decrease in the male homosexual population with the current families of one or two children.
And here I been thinkin' all along that they were butt-hole babies... ;P
Any background info on the writer of the article or the "prof"?
Bogaert ping. What is it with that name and buggery, anyway?