Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
I already told you that this was not his thesis. It was a passing comment with some truth to it, but not the whole truth. Becoming gay could also be due to bad heterosexual relationships. And of course it can be due to plain old preference. I'm not going to be grilled by you on this topic anymore because it has nothing to do with the veracity of his 3 discoveries.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chuck
But surely it has everything to do with the veracity of the claim itself. You say that there is "some truth" to it (or at least to how you say it should be interpreted, which is rather different from what is actually written) - I just want to know what the factual basis for that truth is. What data substantiates that truth?
Where is the data to support the claim that "becoming gay could also be due to bad heterosexual relationships?" What is the factual basis to support the claim that homo-sexuals become homo-sexuals because they can't meet someone of the opposite sex, like when they are in prison, or just can't get a date?
peacegirl, this is what studying claims looks like. Why are you so hostile to it?
|
I'm not hostile to it. I believe he said this to show that when the environmental conditions change no one will be left out when it comes to finding a mate. He probably didn't realize that this would be scrutinized to the point where people would become suspicious over the accuracy of his discoveries. The bottom line is that regardless of ones sexual preference, people will stay together until death do they part due to the changes in the environment and the application of these principles. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Vivisectus
Bold mine. See how that works PG? I am pointing out that I changed something in your text so people do not get the wrong idea and think it was you. It is generally considered a good idea.
|
You're right.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Vivisectus
Thing is - he complained about people NOT scrutinizing over the accuracy of the discoveries he claimed to have made. And then, when people DO investigate his claims, and ask "why should we believe this is true?" you get all bent out of shape. You are so defensive you will happily cut whole pieces out even. Talk about advance blaming!
|
You're very confused about advance blame. Advance blame is when I ask you do something and when you don't, I blame you for not doing it. I just hope that people don't give up on this major discovery because of the false things said about him.
BTW, I did not cut whole pieces out. I left out the explicit parts and the one part on homosexuality. I did not change any of the concepts. I compiled all of his books so people would get 7 books in 1.