Everything the Media Claimed about Gender and Sexuality is WRONG

[GMDino]

(08-25-2016, 09:47 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: Could you clarify this ?

If I am correct, (it happens) there are more beneficial neuro-chemicals produced by people that "believe" in a god, than those that do not.
I'm getting ready for bed, or I'd search for the study.
I think they tried to call it "The God Gene Theory", or something of the like.
If I'm interpreting incorrectly, please forgive a tried old man.


Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

What about people who believe in unicorns and faeries?

[Rotobeast]

(08-25-2016, 09:49 PM)GMDino Wrote: What about people who believe in unicorns and faeries?

Not sure anyone had funded that study, yet.
I'd honestly wager there would be somewhat similar results though.
If people think about positive things, I'm going to say their health would be improved.
(Probably why I think about boobs a lot)
It does make you wonder where the vengeful God crowd would fall, in the neuro-chemical realm.


Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-25-2016, 05:57 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Was this when folks were taking the word of that female blogger over McHugh's because they are open-minded? 

(08-25-2016, 06:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: But no thoughts on an opinion piece written by a blogger on Transadvocate? Surely no bias there. 

(08-25-2016, 07:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No Fred, your link calls it an opinion piece. Keep that "open" mind. 

(08-25-2016, 07:44 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It was just interesting that one source gave you pause because it was partisan (biased); yet another did not. But at least you didn't want to pile on.  

(08-25-2016, 07:49 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Nope, I'm just going to take it for what it is. An opinion piece written by an obviously biased author posted on an obviously biased website.

Keep digging and keep that mind "open" fred. I remember how funny it was last time. 

(08-25-2016, 08:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Guess we just disagree on something giving one pause. 

(08-25-2016, 09:32 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No doubt I am the one who has failed in this thread. You came in hard with your biased opinion piece that you spent "a lot of time" researching, call McHugh a schill, and suggest you produce facts.

You dismiss McHugh's findings and call him a schill and then in Fred logic call someone else childish for attacking a source.

Between the 2 of us 1 has failed.

(08-25-2016, 06:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: But no thoughts on an opinion piece written by a blogger on Transadvocate? Surely no bias there. 

(08-25-2016, 07:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No Fred, your link calls it an opinion piece. Keep that "open" mind. 

(08-25-2016, 07:44 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It was just interesting that one source gave you pause because it was partisan (biased); yet another did not. But at least you didn't want to pile on.  

(08-25-2016, 07:49 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Nope, I'm just going to take it for what it is. An opinion piece written by an obviously biased author posted on an obviously biased website.

Keep digging and keep that mind "open" fred. I remember how funny it was last time. 

(08-25-2016, 08:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Guess we just disagree on something giving one pause. 

(08-25-2016, 09:32 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No doubt I am the one who has failed in this thread. You came in hard with your biased opinion piece that you spent "a lot of time" researching, call McHugh a schill, and suggest you produce facts.

You dismiss McHugh's findings and call him a schill and then in Fred logic call someone else childish for attacking a source.

Between the 2 of us 1 has failed.

So far you haven't had a damn thing to say about the actual topic. Thank Zues you are here to tell everyone to attack the message and not the messenger while you ignore your own "t shirt" slogans. 

[GMDino]

(08-25-2016, 09:55 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: Not sure anyone had funded that study, yet.
I'd honestly wager there would be somewhat similar results though.
If people think about positive things, I'm going to say their health would be improved.
(Probably why I think about boobs a lot)
It does make you wonder where the vengeful God crowd would fall, in the neuro-chemical realm.


Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

But that's not scientific proof of god...or unicorns.  It's thinking happy thoughts makes you happy.



As the the vengeful god:  A dear, old friend of mine who now won't speak with me because of politics and religion once scolded me for believing that god wasn't angry and demanding but rather had a sense of humor and didn't mind human folly.

But, to be fair, my friend had indeed attended many more bible classes than me so he probably knew more about god than just me thinking about it.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-25-2016, 09:47 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: Could you clarify this ?

If I am correct, (it happens) there are more beneficial neuro-chemicals produced by people that "believe" in a god, than those that do not.
I'm getting ready for bed, or I'd search for the study.
I think they tried to call it "The God Gene Theory", or something of the like.
If I'm interpreting incorrectly, please forgive a tried old man.


Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

How many beneficial neuro-chemicals are evidence Zeus/Allah/Odin/Etc exist?

100?  1000?  42?

[Rotobeast]

(08-25-2016, 10:20 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: How many beneficial neuro-chemicals are evidence Zeus/Allah/Odin/Etc exist?

100?  1000?  42?

We know the ultimate answer is always 42.
Did you bring a towel ?


Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-25-2016, 10:25 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: We know the ultimate answer is always 42.
Did you bring a towel ?


Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

We apologize for the inconvenience. 

[Rotobeast]

(08-25-2016, 10:36 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: We apologize for the inconvenience. 

Ha !
Well played.

Now I'm going to go check out that mountain.

Side thought: Is the internet our Babelfish ?

On topic: Lucie sent me the OP's article today and he misses you all.
Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[fredtoast]

(08-25-2016, 09:32 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No doubt I am the one who has failed in this thread. You came in hard with your biased opinion piece that you spent "a lot of time" researching, call McHugh a schill, and suggest you produce facts.

You dismiss McHugh's findings and call him a schill and then in Fred logic call someone else childish for attacking a source.

Between the 2 of us 1 has failed.

I have posted links to a long list of studies showing that McHugh is wrong.

I posted a quote that showed how McHugh tried to spin the results of s study to claimnit proved something it did not.

I posted proof that McHugh was more influenced by religion than science because he claimed opposes stem cell research on the basis that single cells were people.


Meanhwile you have made a dozen posts and not yet posted one single fact or argument to support your position.  All you have claimed is that you ignore any and all information from any source that supports a position you do not agree with.




But you are 100% correct that of the two of us one has failed.

[Belsnickel]

(08-25-2016, 08:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Guess we just disagree on something giving one pause. 

I am not sure what your point here is. I didn't read Fred's post, so it didn't give me pause.

[*bfine32*]

(08-25-2016, 10:58 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I have posted links to a long list of studies showing that McHugh is wrong.

I posted a quote that showed how McHugh tried to spin the results of s study to claimnit proved something it did not.

I posted proof that McHugh was more influenced by religion than science because he claimed opposes stem cell research on the basis that single cells were people.


Meanhwile you have made a dozen posts and not yet posted one single fact or argument to support your position.  All you have claimed is that you ignore any and all information from any source that supports a position you do not agree with.




But you are 100% correct that of the two of us one has failed.

Hell, some may consider McHale's findings as evidence and I have cited them in the past. Obviously not at solid as an opinion piece by the transgender advocate, but still something. 

I now remember why I found the earlier thread so entertaining. 

Did you at least tip the transadvocate when you used her opinion piece as your proof. 

And I appreciate your affirmation of one of us failing.  

[*bfine32*]

(08-25-2016, 11:02 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I am not sure what your point here is. I didn't read Fred's post, so it didn't give me pause.

Even after I pointed out how biased it may have been compared to the link that you didn't want to pile on?

But not reading Fred's posts is probably a sensible policy. 

[fredtoast]

(08-25-2016, 11:08 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Hell, some may consider McHale's findings as evidence and I have cited them in the past. Obviously not at solid as an opinion piece by the transgender advocate, but still something. 

I now remember why I found the earlier thread so entertaining. 

Did you at least tip the transadvocate when you used her opinion piece as your proof. 

And I appreciate your affirmation of one of us failing.  

Still in denial about all the studies linked in my posts and the proof that McHugh misinterpreted the findings of a major study to come to a conclusion that even the authors of the study said was not valid.

[fredtoast]

(08-25-2016, 11:08 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Hell, some may consider McHale's findings as evidence

[*bfine32*]

(08-25-2016, 11:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Still in denial about all the studies linked in my posts and the proof that McHugh misinterpreted the findings of a major study to come to a conclusion that even the authors of the study said was not valid.

Now I understand why Matt doesn't read your posts. 

Roll with your opinion piece and keep that mind open. 

[Belsnickel]

(08-25-2016, 11:12 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Even after I pointed out how biased it may have been compared to the link that you didn't want to pile on?

But not reading Fred's posts is probably a sensible policy. 

Yup. Just scrolled past it. I mean, I saw the trans advocate name in the link as I did so because it was a different color, but I really didn't care what they had to say.