fs1013 wrote:
There’s No Gay Gene, Says Scientists
標題就直接說 "科學家說，沒有 Gay 基因"，這不是直接往你臉上招呼嗎? 我一定會去留言抗議的，你放心。
我覺得他們兩人最後的結論最有意思，”Does this change anything? I don’t think so…”
同一件事，MSN Now的報導標題是: “Scientists think they’ve finally figured out homosexuality (again)"
你英文好到還要擔心別人看不懂，麻煩說明一下最後那個 “again” 是什麼意思好嗎?
你這兩篇,也是癈文篇,只是"think".,文中也沒指明,基因論是錯在那,
這話,有說等同於沒說,更何況,wiki 你都不信,為什麼要相信一篇新聞??
你是選擇性相信??
還有,再看看,你提供連結的標題 "A team of scientists have concluded that there probably isn’t a gay gene. Sexual orientation, they say, has nothing to do with genetics, and is something in the DNA that is expressed in the womb"
http://sourcefednews.com/theres-no-gay-gene-says-scientists/
黑體字,有看清楚?? 意思就是說,是不是同性戀,還是由DNA來裁決,換言之,
一個人,是不是同性戀,本身是沒有選擇權的,仍是由自身DNA在子宮胚胎形成時決定,
所以,你所提供的這個連結,
剛剛好加強了我的基因理論...fs1013 wrote:
Wiki Environment and sexual orientation
注意一下第二段，特別是最後一句:
The American Psychological Association stated, "Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles."
你這篇,是從心理學的理論出發,文章的論點,共沒有支持的相關理論,只是一種陳述,看不出來有何價值??
而且,你這篇,又剛剛好打了你上一篇文章的臉,你是自打嘴巴,你知道不知道丫??
人能文盲如斯,當之不易丫....我不是有一篇 gov 政府公家單位的網頁嗎?? 為什麼你就跳過那一章?? 你是選擇性看文??
你找了個文,來砸你自己的腳,真是天才了....
....