Replies

To simply tout studies that agree with your argument and reject studies that tend to challenge your position, as you seem to be doing, is intellectually dishonest. Or, in other words, you're fooling yourself.

Can you show me anywhere I tout “my” studies over yours? You keep digging your hole deeper and deeper.

At least I'm taking all studies into consideration.

Yet another lie, you’ve only cited the ASU study that said "[The] findings are interpreted as supporting the argument for a biological basis in sexual orientation." while panning the studies I cited. You are rediculous and a liar.

You're simply commited to opposing anything I say and giving the worst possible interpretation to anything I say. This again is why any expectation of reasonableness from you and your ilk is folly. If you want to be out on that easily dismissed fringe of marginal importance, suit yourself. Unfortunately for you, most people appreciate logic and reason.

In several posts you've touted a study that supposedly shows a 0% correlation of sexual orientation among twins. On the face, that is a silly assertion, since by mere random probability, both twins might be gay in the same proportion as homosexuality appears in the general population, which credible estimates ranging from 2 to 5 percent.

On the contrary, although I earlier cited the ASU study, you've inferred that as an indication that my entire understanding of the subject lies with that one study when I've clearly stated that's not the case.

I presume that you're intelligent enough to realize that, but you're merely being captious in order to keep up your illogical insults toward me.