Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tdadams
But in context, your interpretation of twin studies is inaccurate.

Isn't yours inaccurate? Even granting a 2 to 1 correlation, that means in half of the cases genetics was not a factor is making the twin gay. The strange thing was though, that these studies also find a correlation between fraternal twins, indicating even the 2 to 1 correlation could not be all attributed to genetics.

52 posted on 06/02/2003 4:34:46 AM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]


To: Always Right
The strange thing was though, that these studies also find a correlation between fraternal twins, indicating even the 2 to 1 correlation could not be all attributed to genetics.

Don't be so ambivilent. Why don't you state what the correlation rates between monozygotic and dizygotic twins were found to be? They're quite different. With little variation, monozygotic twins have a correlation of about 1 in 2, dizygotic twins only 1 in 5.

Again, you're making a blatantly dishonest representation. The reasons why are obvious. The studies don't support your conclusions. But somehow, by amazing contortions of logic, you're able to convince yourself that the studies actually draw a conclusion exactly opposite of what they conclude by any objective analysis.

59 posted on 06/02/2003 5:09:19 AM PDT by tdadams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson