April 14, 2010

After we both answered a question about homosexuality on R&S, known fundie No Chance Without Jesus emails me.  The following is the ensuing conversation, in its entirety.


“Identical twins are far more likely to have the same sexual preference than siblings.


But is it the shared nature, or the shared nurture and life experiences that bring them to that?


Not to be a jerk, but I’m a scientist. I don’t make these things up.

Over 50% of identical twins with at least one homosexual member share sexual preference. 22% of fraternal twins and 11% of siblings with one homosexual member share sexual preference. This clearly indicates that sexual preference depends both upon genetics and interuterine conditions.

Here’s the link if you can comprehend a scientific journal article

For more casual reading (laymans terms) try this report from the university of texas:

The twin data show that identical twins have about 50% concordance for sexual preference in some studies, 30% in others. Fraternal twins have nearly half this concordance. So these data suggest that there is a modest effect of genetics. Other data, using a combination of molecular techniques and pedigrees, suggest that an X-linked gene or region influences sexual preference, but that finding has not been confirmed in all careful studies.


Factously untrue

you sure are aware of the much closer relatiosnhip of identicals

What KIND of scientist are you……

not to be a jerk

With scientists like this, Rape and Abuse….who needs fiction writers


So you read the scientific studies on homosexuality in twins and siblings, realized you were beaten and have no retort, but instead of accepting truth and reason decided to reply with an ad hominem attack? The truth is homosexuality is not a choice. Yes, you can always chose to not have sex. But you cannot chose what gender you are sexually attracted to.

And my name “Rape or † Abuse” is a double entendre. It parodies the “report abuse” button so often abused by you fundies while posing the question “rape, or religious abuse?” in reference to the catholic child molesters.

And if you really want to know “what kind of scientist I am” I study cancer tissues to find the genomic aberrations that lead to the proliferation and metastasis of tumors. I also study serum proteins in diseased patients in attempts to find a biomarker for early cancer diagnosis.


So your a lab tech

I see


Actually no, I’m not a lab technician. I’m a bioprocess chemical engineer. I design the workflows to answer the principle investigators research questions, which are then performed by the lab techs. Also, I design software to ascertain knowledge from the raw data.

Weren’t we debating homosexuality? What happened to that topic? Or have you just admitted defeat?



What’s the matter, get tired of our little discussion when you couldn’t mock me?

what do you do for a living? let me guess…rape children? Either that or you’re retaking the 7th grade for the 7th time…


Ooooh you became offended

The debate moved into the fallacy of the data you were providing….which you defended by saying you were a “sceintist”. If you are going to use that as an authority, we are going to delve into to that authority. I take it that your cancer screening doesn’t deal with genetics of twins.

So we can go back to the “facts” if you like but lets stick the facts


I could be the boogeyman for all you know, but my credentials have no bearing on the validity of the articles I showed you. I had no part in those studies. I did not generate the data. I’m only providing you, the ignoramus, with the results in hopes that you can come to your own conclusions. The source I provided was just one of the research papers on the subject published in a peer reviewed scientific journal. Try searching pubmed sometime. That’s where you will find facts.

Why are you obsessed with what I do? I don’t screen patients. I never see patients. I devise novel methods of extracting, separating, quantifying, and identifying biomolecules from archived samples taken from patients at their time of diagnosis. I use statistical models and computer algorithms to interpret complex datasets and relate genomic and proteomic changes to disease phenotypes.

Now, we must delve into why you change the subject and refuse to discuss clear facts simply because they disagree with your incorrect preconceived notions. Does it have anything to do with your propensity to rape babies?


I can produce articles saying the opposite, what we have here, is a failure to communicate.

You have an agenda and you bend the truth to support that. I got it


Please do. I would LOVE to see your peer reviewed research papers accepted into a major scientific journal that says identical twins, fraternal twins, and siblings have the exact same concordance rate of sexual preference as the general population.

If you can produce such evidence I will certainly take it into consideration. I will not call you names, stick fingers in my ears and yell “LALALA”

You seem to think I have some agenda here. My only agenda is to find the truth. That’s what scientists do. I start with knowledge and produce a theory that best explain the facts. I modify this theory if new evidence presents itself.

You, as a fundie, start with a theory called “the word of God” search for evidence to support your theory, and reject and conflicting evidence (like the research papers I showed you)

We don’t have a failure to communicate. You have a failure to understand science, and I have difficulty believing what you say without evidence.


peer reviewed…….we are done.


It’s not scientific research if you do it in your basement, type it up on your apple IIe, and show it to your church congregation. If it’s good research, you will share it with other trained scientists who can study the paper to find errors.

So you’re saying there are no research studies that show twins and strangers are just as likely to have the same sexual preference? Pity, and here I thought I was going to learn something.


“Pity, and here I thought I was going to learn something.”

Had you had ears to hear, you just might have.


If you’re referring to your nonsensical statement “but is it the nature or the nurture that makes them more likely to be homosexual?” then it’s clear you are the one without ears or, more likely, a brain.

If raising your kids the wrong way causes them to be gay, then why are identical twins more than twice as likely to share the same sexual preference as fraternal twins? The only explanation is a genetic component.

If bad parenting causes children to be gay, then why are fraternal twins twice as likely to share the same sexual preference as siblings? The only explanation is an in-utero component.

Is your hearing aid on? Or are you just tuning all this out? Perhaps you’re too busy raping babies to bother with using your brain…