gavin wrote:The idea is that any genes that contributed to you being sterile are genes that will now no longer be passed on. Any trait that inhibits the ability pass on genetic information is apparently against survival of the fittest where the most fit to survive is the one who is able to reproduce the most.smbcfan wrote:not wrote:I'm confused about this comic. apparently what it says is that anyone who makes a coherent argument against homosexuality being genetic is a fat loser? Why on earth would anyone ever want to read this?
How is it coherent? "All human beings ever" are not optimized for heterosexual reproduction, even setting aside the fat loser shut-in portrayed in the comic. I was born intersex and sterile, for example.
That's how the argument is generally posed. It is a coherent argument pertaining to the likelihood that homosexuality is an inherited genetic trait, but it fails to disagree with evolution or the possibility that it's caused by something else (perhaps it is a defect caused by something in our diet or maybe it is merely something we haven't figured out yet).
Usually some right-winged people take this argument and run way too far with it, to some unknown ends I guess. Even if homosexuality was a choice, who cares and how does it affect anyone else?
Kimra wrote:Ed! What you doing tonight?
ol qwerty bastard wrote:bitcoin is backed by math, and math is intrinsically perfect and logically consistent always
gödel stop spreading fud
Edminster wrote:Pretty much the farthest thing from sex, really.
(shortened your quote to make the post smaller) Your statements are very true. The thing is that this trait would diminish the frequency of reproduction so if it were a gene it should still be diminishing with each generation rather than increasing like it is. There are other factors that could slow the diminishing of it as well. Such as the fact that a gay parent doesn't necessarily produce gay offspring. If it were genetic, then it's possible that the children become carriers of one gene. That being said, it should still be diminishing since several hurdles need to be taken for a homosexual individual to have children, such as using a lab or having sex with a gender you are possibly repulsed by.smiley_cow wrote:While I don't disagree that sexual orientation is most likely based on more than just genetics I think it's worth pointing out that being gay doesn't necessarily mean you won't biologically have children or you don't have the willingness to reproduce. Even if you're married to someone of the same sex, it's still not uncommon to have a surrogate mother, have a child through artificial insemination, etc.
Sickle Cell Anemia is a bitch, you're right. But carrying only one of the genes is what allows the individuals have better odds at survive malaria. Having just one gene is not the same as having two. The one-gened individuals are the ones that are passing along the gene so successfully because they are not dying from Malaria and they don't actually have Sickle Cell Anemia. What they have is sickle cell trait and as such they have a 3/4th's chance of producing offspring that at least don't have Sickle Cell Anemia. Sickle Cell trait can carry it's own problems but they are more rare than common.Loraxxe wrote:For starters, Sickle Cell Anemia is an extremely maladaptive trait. It's the underlying genetics making at least twice as many babies (I don't know if SCA affects prenatal viability) fit enough in a high-malaria environment that keeps the gene around. If homosexuality followed the same pattern, even ignoring group fitness, the theoretical "gay gene" could certainly be helpful overall. But if it were that simple and absolute, the gene likely would have been identified by now. It's likely far more complicated, and chemicals certainly seem to be playing a significant role nowadays, at least prenatally. Like most traits, genetics, epigenetics, and environmental factors all likely play a role.
1. Then it would be magic. I could see scarcity of resources resulting in us using products that may increase homosexuality, but I do not see evolution creating a new gene due to some odd foresight. That would make it god.Phaazoid wrote:what if being gay is actually evolution working it's magic? Overpopulation is the earths biggest problem right now. We already know how to use artificial insemination, the species wouldn't die out if everyone was gay. And it would finally kill, or at least severely hurt a lot of major religions if everyone were gay, another large threat to the earth in general. maybe evolution, is like, conscious.
I've built palaces in the sky, castles hewn into the mountain sides, netherworld gates to travel faster as well as irrigation channels saddled with rail-road tracks. I've even made a giant galleon ship out of wood blocks and white cotton squares.Edminister wrote:Minecraft
I can't see it being anything else. It isn't on a server. I think I'll shoot for an older english period model since cobbled stones are so easy.Kimra wrote:Will it be a ghost town? Because ghost towns are cool.
ol qwerty bastard wrote:bitcoin is backed by math, and math is intrinsically perfect and logically consistent always
gödel stop spreading fud
I am right now sitting on a phone conference with people from three continents that are learning the product I've been working on for two years now. You have no idea how bored I am.Gangler wrote:Phaazoid suggests that evolution may perhaps be Bizarro-God on a quest to kill religion by bringing the novel Brave New World to fruition through the power of homosexuality and someone felt that needed a rebuttal.
I just feel the need to bring attention to the fact that this happened.
Return to Latest Comic Discussion 3: Revenge of the Son of Latest Comic Discussion 2
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests