Posted: May 09, 2016 3:29 am
tuco wrote:Aha .. now back on topic. What is the scientific consensus? I will repeat, "identical twins are not identical" does not refute the mentioned study about twins.
Really? The alleged study, and your advocacy of it, is based entirely on the assumption that so-called identical twins are, in fact, truly identical.
That's your ENTIRE premise.
The fact that the fundamental element of your entire argument is FALSE, therefore means that the entire "study" HAS been refuted.
If you want to continue playing with this, you need to get into the details, INCLUDE the fact that "identical twins" is really more of a slang term than a rigorous scientific one, and then further expand the informational basis of the "study" to include with certainty, what exactly in our DNA does affect sexuality, so that you can finally derive a LEGITIMATE conclusion that remaining factors are environmental.
I would suggest, since that is currently impossible, since gene mapping has NOT told us what all the genes do, just what they are chemically...that you recognize that the conclusion you want to be able to decide about is currently unreachable.