09-11-2015, 07:09 PM
(09-11-2015, 02:28 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: *sighs
Waste of time again.
Yes I'm very well aware there is no evidence that supports your side.
There is no evidence to support either side.
Quote:I understand how MF genetics work. I said that if homosexuality was genetic, then it would most likely fall under the MF category because it doesn't really fit into any of the other genetic mutations and it mimics other MF disorders. You're the one denied it as a possibility.
You don't understand at all. You went on and on about how multifactorial genetic disorders are environmental. They are multifactorial. Meaning more than one factor. It's in the name. One of those factors is genetics. It is also in the name. They are the result of both intrinsic and extrinsic factors, e.g. genetics and environment combined. You wouldn't admit the genetic component. I never denied it was a possibility. I wrote it was one of many possibilities and there was no evidence which supported multifactorial genetic disorder over any other genetic disorder.
Quote:Or are you denying that you said this?
"oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: [url=http://bengalsboard.net/Thread-Target-removes-gender-based-signage-for-kids?pid=54189#pid54189][/url]Multifactorial disorders are only one of many types of genetic disorders. You have zero evidence homosexuality is a multifactorial disorder instead of any of the other genetics disorders. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Zero. "
Yes, I wrote that and if you didn't have a problem with reading comprehension you would understand the last half of that sentence means you can't claim it is a multifactorial genetic disorder over any other genetic disorder without evidence. You're making an assumption and passing it off as fact. Science and medicine doesn't work that way. You need evidence to support your hypothesis and you don't have any evidence to support you hypothesis.
Quote:You're line about heterosexuals has no point. I already stated many different types of sexual gratification that people get from various types of sex and that included both Heterosexuals and Homosexuals. So you really have no point there other than you are trying to say that heterosexuals have problems too, as a means to quantify homosexuality. Strawman argument sprinkled in with your favorite the argumentum ad hominem.
You mean "qualify" not quantify. You don't understand what a strawman argument is. You don't understand multifactorial genetic disorders. Your opinions in this arena are ignorant, uneducated, and have the naivete of a child. Hell, you can't even use quantify and qualify correctly. I don't care you believe combating blatant ignorance is ad hominem. Especially when you incorrectly classifying homosexuality as a mental disorder or "an addictive sexual behavior" because you're ignorant of the basic definition of a mental disorder.
Quote:I didn't abandon that route, you made it very clear to me that it's not a possibility so I decided that there was no need to pursue that angle anymore.
I never wrote it wasn't a possibility. You tried to pass off an assumption as fact without any evidence. In addition, you didn't even understand your own assumption.
Quote: You brought up that it's possible for it to happen in the womb, I won't completely disagree with that, but it's not a true statement.
Have you heard of fetal alcohol syndrome? It is caused by extrinsic factors (maternal alcohol consumption) that occur in the womb. Maternal alcohol consumption has been linked to autism spectrum disorder. It is possible autism is caused by alcohol exposure while in the womb, but signs of autism behavior don't begin until the child is at least 6 months old or older.
Quote:Last but not least, which groups criteria do you wish to use to figure out if it is a disorder or not?
How about we use what the professionals use? DSM-V
