(05-22-2012 02:13 PM)Rebel Wrote: (05-22-2012 01:57 PM)UCF08 Wrote: They might be supporting some of the policies you claim they do, but that doesn't mean you're at all accurately describing any of their views. The two are not at all the same, lest I say YOU HATE BLACK PEOPLE THAT'S WHY YOU WANT TO GET RID OF WELFARE, which I wouldn't because it's an inaccurate statement of your views (or a random conservatives views, it's not important).
In short, you're being a hypocrite, and your posts should just be ignored as they are needlessly divisive and pointless.
Why would you infer that welfare is a program for black people? Seems like you are the real racist here. Are blacks not capable of obtaining gainful employment in your eyes?
I would expect an administrator to be able to have the ability for at least some half decent back-and-forth, but I guess that would be expect too much.
Quote:Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo <shock>
No need to be a dick, I certainly wasn't intended to be, just sharing some knowledge I have that the average person doesn't considering I'm back in school working on getting Biomedical Sciences degree and going to PA school. Like I said, I'm not an expert, so if you know something I don't, please inform me.
Quote:um no..
the more we learn the more we know that every aspect of who we are is both nurture and nature. Aside from outliers nothing is just one or the other.
Terms like nurture v. nature aren't really relevant when we're discussing the factors of heritability that I was. My point is that we don't even understand all of the genetic factors for many diseases, like cancer or parkinsons, so using genetic markers (or nature? i guess you would say) to ascribe personality traits or choice of sexuality is *WAY* off.
Quote:"All traits—from 'biological' traits like hair color and height to complex 'psychological' traits like intelligence—are caused by dependent interactions of genes and environments," David S. Moore Phd
You can't even get that right...
We know approximately what color someones hair might be baeed on a subset of gene paired but the world they live in will push it in one of several directions.
You make this post as if it makes my post wrong somehow, when it clearly doesn't. Environmental factors can be anything from nutrition to exposure to radiation, so of course those are factors in every expression of ones genes. However, the genotypes can almost assuredly be predicted for such things like hair and eye color, and while the persons phenotype can't be as accurately predicted (though it really can in this day and age), that's mostly irrelevant to the discussion of heritability in the context we were having it in.
Quote:I can't tell if this is a hypothetical or not. Is this just you making a case or is this some kind of statistical anomaly you're pointing at?
No, it's been very well documented, and it was simply being used to show the vast and widely varied possible causes for homosexuality.
Quote:But *nothing* outside the womb could shape this right?
Never claimed that, nor would I ever. For the record, I'm not really sure what's with your dick attitude towards me in this thread, considering I was nothing but polite. But, if you want to get all science-y in here, let's do the damn thing. I could use a break from Organic Chem studying to refresh myself on embryology and genetics.
