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

To: Always Right
What is so dishonest. A greater than 1 in 5 rate for homosexality is quite significant.

Exactly. Thank you for making my point!

If non-twin siblings have an orientation correlation of 1 in 20, dizygotic twins have a correlation of 1 in 5 and monozygotic twins have a correlation of 1 in 2, that is statistically significant.

There would seem to be an indisputable, if unknown, biological element involved in sexual orientation.

96 posted on 06/02/2003 6:30:51 AM PDT by tdadams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]


To: tdadams
There would seem to be an indisputable, if unknown, biological element involved in sexual orientation.

As there is an equally if not more significant environment element involvled. And being human, it is still ultimately a choice.

100 posted on 06/02/2003 7:02:29 AM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies ]

To: tdadams
If non-twin siblings have an orientation correlation of 1 in 20, dizygotic twins have a correlation of 1 in 5 and monozygotic twins have a correlation of 1 in 2, that is statistically significant.

But what about the MZ twins that have a 0% concordance, why are they not statistically significant? If you can't answer this you really have no credible argument.

106 posted on 06/02/2003 7:21:26 AM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | 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