Evolution Disproven

Doveaman · Apr 3, 2019

Hank77 said:
??
But they can reproduce if they choose to and heterosexual people may choose not to reproduce.
I don't think you thought this idea through very well.

It takes a man and woman to reproduce.

How exactly can a homosexual couple reproduce?

Doveaman · Apr 3, 2019

Occams Barber said:
We're all (including you) mutants.

Yeah right, and I'm Wolverine.

I don't need a fork...I eat with my hands.

We each carry our own little collection of mutations. Some have been (or will be) passed on to our children - some will not.

Carrying a collection of mutations does not make us mutants, just as micro evolution is not macro evolution.

Doveaman · Apr 3, 2019

Occams Barber said:
To be useful, an evolutionary trait doesn't need to be necessary. It only has to confer a reproductive advantage (i.e., result in more viable offspring) on the population as a whole.

Well that disqualifies homosexuality.

It's rare for a single change to be the sole means of preventing a population from going extinct. Any given animal or plant is a large collection of evolutionary advantages.

Some mutations are neutral. They are neither advantageous nor disadvantageous and may spread through a population randomly (its a statistical thing) or be dragged along as a secondary characteristic of an advantageous change.

Does evolution produce what is unnecessary?

The answer is a qualified "Yes".

Is homosexuality a part of our biological evolution? And if it is, would it not be caused by environmental pressures and adaptation to those pressures?

Doveaman · Apr 3, 2019

Tanj said:
Is anything? Different traits have different, sometime antagonistic effects on fitness. Male genes try for bigger babies because they are more likely to survive. Female genes push for smaller babies because they are easier to give birth to, and the woman more likely to survive to have more babies. We can look back and explain what is. We cannot work out what could have been or even more what should have been.

I don't see how homosexuality has any benefit to a population's survival.
In fact, an argument can be made that it is a threat to survival since it does not reproduce.

I think having wings and being able to soar like an eagle would have improved our population. Evolution disagrees.

Or maybe it's a work in progress. If dinosaurs can grow wings, why can't we.

Depends on your definition of unnecessary.

Here's a good article on the Russian guy that bred domesticated foxes:

Why domesticated foxes are genetically fascinating (and terrible pets)

most relevantly:

"One of the lab’s most interesting findings is that the friendly foxes exhibit physical traits not seen in the wild, such as spots in their fur and curled tails. Their ears show weird traits, too."

These kinds of passenger traits exist in the wild as well. Are they necessary? I'd argue not.

The foxes might disagree.

HitchSlap · Apr 3, 2019

Doveaman said:
No.

It doesn't work that way.

I know gay men who have biological offspring, so apparently it can work that way.

HitchSlap · Apr 3, 2019

Doveaman said:
I wasn't aware there were homosexual animals.
There's a book on homosexual animals too?

Homosexuality has been observed in over 1,500 different species.

lasthero · Apr 3, 2019

Doveaman said:
Homosexuality disproves evolution.
Evolution is about adapting to survive and reproduce.
Homosexuality does not reproduce.
Therefore homosexuality falsifies evolution.

My brother is gay.

I’m not.

Neither of my parents are.

I think I see a problem in your thinking.

HitchSlap · Apr 3, 2019

Doveaman said:
Homosexuality disproves evolution.
Evolution is about adapting to survive and reproduce.
Homosexuality does not reproduce.
Therefore homosexuality falsifies evolution.

Are you trying to tell us something?

Neo-Nazi who said homosexuality was 'unnatural' revealed as paedophile who groomed young boys

Occams Barber · Apr 3, 2019

Doveaman said:
Yeah right, and I'm Wolverine.
Carrying a collection of mutations does not make us mutants, just as micro evolution is not macro evolution.

With an avatar like Doveaman I should have guessed that your version of 'mutant' would be something out of a 1950s B movie.

Every cell in your body carries the DNA sequence that makes you what you are. Your cells are constantly reproducing, and in the process, copying and recopying this DNA sequence. Occasionally the process goes slightly wrong (chemistry ain't perfect) and the DNA sequence gets accidentally changed. At the same time external factors like subatomic particles flying through your body or virus' will interact with a cell's DNA and change the sequence.

Sometimes whole sequences of DNA are inserted or deleted or transposed.

Where a change affects the DNA of a sex cell (think sperm or egg) this change can be passed on to offspring in the parental DNA shuffle which takes place when we reproduce. In this way a mutation which existed in one cell in the parent becomes part of all of the cells of the child as the original cell reproduces.

In a sense you're right - there's no such thing as a 'mutant' - but we all carry mutations which we can, potentially, pass on to our kids.
OB

Hank77 · Apr 3, 2019

Doveaman said:
It takes a man and woman to reproduce.

How exactly can a homosexual couple reproduce?

You didn't say reproduce together. What's that got to do with evolution?

Tanj · Apr 3, 2019

Doveaman said:
I don't see how homosexuality has any benefit to a population's survival.

Sure, but just because you are incredulous about it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Your low credulity threshold is not a yardstick by which we measure reality, and why would I listen to anyone with no training, education or experience in any of the biological sciences tell me what evolution is or is not?

There's quite alot of evidence now that the genetic component of male homosexuality leads to increased fecundity in females. Here's one such

Fecundity of Paternal and Maternal Non-Parental Female Relatives of Homosexual and Heterosexual Men

In fact, an argument can be made that it is a threat to survival since it does not reproduce.

An argument easily refuted by the evidence I gave above, which included the non reproductivity in its model

SkyWriting · Apr 3, 2019

Doveaman said:
Which proves my point, they do not reproduce.

Point denied. My cousin and her spouse had two boys, now in college.
Proof dissolved.

A friend of mine had children with her husband, then one with a woman, then adopted 4 more. In what world do you live in that blended families are not good for the species? Not in my world. Your point is devolved.

SkyWriting · Apr 3, 2019

Doveaman said:
God didn't create mutants.

Wrong on so many fronts. Your god is really that tiny you won't give Him full credit for His works?

Your going to stick with mutations as not part of God's plan?
Ridiculous.

Gene2memE · Apr 3, 2019

Doveaman said:
It takes a man and woman to reproduce.

How exactly can a homosexual couple reproduce?

Human groups with homosexuals in them exhibit notably higher reproductive success over the whole population. Generally speaking, the presence of nurturing but non-reproductive individuals in the population provides a greater level of resources for those who do reproduce. Thus, the presence of homosexuals in a population leads to higher birth rates overall AND lower child mortality rates.

All of this information is available with basic web browsing skills and 30 minutes of reading time.

Tinker Grey · Apr 3, 2019

Occams Barber said:
With an avatar like Doveaman I should have guessed that your version of 'mutant' would be something out of a 1950s B movie.

With homoerotic overtones. Quite a codpiece on that costume.

St. Helens · Apr 3, 2019

MOD HAT ON

MOD HAT OFF

Occams Barber · Apr 4, 2019

Tinker Grey said:
With homoerotic overtones. Quite a codpiece on that costume.

Agreed. Another genitally fixated super hero wannabee with a bulging muscle fetish and a habit of wearing his undies on the outside.

Shemjaza · Apr 4, 2019

Doveaman said:
Homosexuality disproves evolution.
Evolution is about adapting to survive and reproduce.
Homosexuality does not reproduce.
Therefore homosexuality falsifies evolution.

There's also a possibility that homosexuality isn't a genetic trait, but a developmental one.

There is a statistical connection between the number of older maternal brothers you have and the chances of being homosexual.

This could still be a genetic trait that makes women especially fertile, and sometimes makes men homosexual. But it could be a consequence of the hormonal changes that women go through multiple pregnancies.

Monk Brendan · Apr 4, 2019

Bruce Leiter said:
That's interesting. I'm convinced more and more that a gay lifestyle and the urges that come along with it are the result of little boys' and girls' confusion at a certain age about their identities and events of abuse and mistreatment then.

What exactly is a gay lifestyle? Some people use this expression as if it means something.

And there is no connection between being a victim of pedophilia and then being gay.

In fact, there's no connection between the two at all, as you are trying helplessly to do.

Monk Brendan · Apr 4, 2019

Doveaman said:
I wasn't aware there were homosexual animals.
There's a book on homosexual animals too?

Yep.

There seems to be a lot you're unaware of regarding both homosexuality AND evolution.

Farmers know about the "dud stud" phenomenon: male farm animals who show no interest in mating with females, but great interest in mounting other males, about 11%, I believe. This corresponds to the infamous Kinsey statistic of 10%.

Mynahs in the wild, who mate for life, frequently form same-sex pairs. I admit this could be a survival strategy rather than homoemotional bonding.

Evolution Disproven

Re-Created, Not Evolved.

Re-Created, Not Evolved.

Re-Created, Not Evolved.

Re-Created, Not Evolved.

PROUDLY PRIMATE

PROUDLY PRIMATE

Newbie

PROUDLY PRIMATE

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Redefined comfortable middle class

The Librarian

The Librarian

Newbie

Wanderer

Reformed Baptist

Newbie

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency