Homosexuality is caused by being molested

[McDonalds5]

I'll just rely on the science that shows a correlation between homophobia, and hidden homosexual tenancies (you're in the closet)

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/homophobes-might-be-hidden-homosexuals/

Science with an agenda is not actual science, it's called politics  Just to let you know 

[valta4065]

I totally agree and it's a social phenomenon also. As homosexualism is advertised more and more in the declining western nations, the number of homosexuals increases. It's just basic demand creation like any other product or social behavior.

So we need a bronze age moral code to keep the number of homosexual in check, is that it?  Or ban homosexuality so that they stay in the closet?  Is that your solution?

Go buy yourself a clue.

Especially considering the amount of homesexual doesn't really evolve. Which means it's just a natural standard.

[bryant.coleman]

Science with an agenda is not actual science, it's called politics  Just to let you know 

If we accept research done by the LGBT lobbying groups, then we should also accept the same done by anti-LGBT groups such as various Christian organizations and conservative groups. This is like using the "research" done by Joseph Goebbels in the 1930s to claim that the Jews are an inferior race. LGBT lobbying groups are the new Nazis.

[yugo23]

Science with an agenda is not actual science, it's called politics  Just to let you know 

If we accept research done by the LGBT lobbying groups, then we should also accept the same done by anti-LGBT groups such as various Christian organizations and conservative groups. This is like using the "research" done by Joseph Goebbels in the 1930s to claim that the Jews are an inferior race. LGBT lobbying groups are the new Nazis.

Well the important part is that the study is not backed by anything!

[mainpmf]

Science with an agenda is not actual science, it's called politics  Just to let you know 

If we accept research done by the LGBT lobbying groups, then we should also accept the same done by anti-LGBT groups such as various Christian organizations and conservative groups. This is like using the "research" done by Joseph Goebbels in the 1930s to claim that the Jews are an inferior race. LGBT lobbying groups are the new Nazis.

Your statement isn't completely stupid but you're wrong, a study can't be judged only by who paid for it and who made it!

[bryant.coleman]

Your statement isn't completely stupid but you're wrong, a study can't be judged only by who paid for it and who made it!

Sample surveys and opinion polls can be manipulated in several ways.

For example, you can ask the same question in two different tones.

1. "Do you want to punish 16-year olds with jail time similar to the case with adult offenders, if they commit serious offenses? Or should they be sent to special juvenile institutions instead?"

and

2. "Do you think that rapists deserve jail-time, even if they are slightly under the age of 18?"

I am quite sure that the percentage of people agreeing with #2 will be more than #1.

[af_newbie]

Science with an agenda is not actual science, it's called politics  Just to let you know 

If we accept research done by the LGBT lobbying groups, then we should also accept the same done by anti-LGBT groups such as various Christian organizations and conservative groups. This is like using the "research" done by Joseph Goebbels in the 1930s to claim that the Jews are an inferior race. LGBT lobbying groups are the new Nazis.

Conservative groups yes, but Christian organizations, well, no.

Bronze age nonsense is where you have to draw the line.

[valta4065]

Your statement isn't completely stupid but you're wrong, a study can't be judged only by who paid for it and who made it!

Sample surveys and opinion polls can be manipulated in several ways.

For example, you can ask the same question in two different tones.

1. "Do you want to punish 16-year olds with jail time similar to the case with adult offenders, if they commit serious offenses? Or should they be sent to special juvenile institutions instead?"

and

2. "Do you think that rapists deserve jail-time, even if they are slightly under the age of 18?"

I am quite sure that the percentage of people agreeing with #2 will be more than #1.

Of course but you can't just take that into account, else you never take any study into account!

Any study has to be made by people, those people have to be paid. Hence there is no truly independant study.

[valta4065]

Science with an agenda is not actual science, it's called politics  Just to let you know 

If we accept research done by the LGBT lobbying groups, then we should also accept the same done by anti-LGBT groups such as various Christian organizations and conservative groups. This is like using the "research" done by Joseph Goebbels in the 1930s to claim that the Jews are an inferior race. LGBT lobbying groups are the new Nazis.

Conservative groups yes, but Christian organizations, well, no.

Bronze age nonsense is where you have to draw the line.

Ahah

Well I say you should accept all and study them.
A good study isn't a study made by an independant organization (there is no such thing) but a study that can be easily criticized, giving precisely the used methodology and the percentage of error.

[criptix]

Your statement isn't completely stupid but you're wrong, a study can't be judged only by who paid for it and who made it!

Sample surveys and opinion polls can be manipulated in several ways.

For example, you can ask the same question in two different tones.

1. "Do you want to punish 16-year olds with jail time similar to the case with adult offenders, if they commit serious offenses? Or should they be sent to special juvenile institutions instead?"

and

2. "Do you think that rapists deserve jail-time, even if they are slightly under the age of 18?"

I am quite sure that the percentage of people agreeing with #2 will be more than #1.

That just means your methodology sucks and that you have no clues about real scientific studies.

[af_newbie]

Science with an agenda is not actual science, it's called politics  Just to let you know 

If we accept research done by the LGBT lobbying groups, then we should also accept the same done by anti-LGBT groups such as various Christian organizations and conservative groups. This is like using the "research" done by Joseph Goebbels in the 1930s to claim that the Jews are an inferior race. LGBT lobbying groups are the new Nazis.

Conservative groups yes, but Christian organizations, well, no.

Bronze age nonsense is where you have to draw the line.

Ahah

Well I say you should accept all and study them.
A good study isn't a study made by an independant organization (there is no such thing) but a study that can be easily criticized, giving precisely the used methodology and the percentage of error.

I think it might be waste of time to analyze Christian studies.  I might be wrong, but I feel whatever they come up with would require you to put bronze age glasses to understand any of it.  These people believe in invisible guy in the sky, crackers that turn into human flesh, wine that turns into blood, and don't get me started on their moral code.  I'm sorry, I'd not listen to studies done by delusional people.

Objective studies, sure.  But studies driven by religious groups by definition are not scientific.

[xslugx]

Your statement isn't completely stupid but you're wrong, a study can't be judged only by who paid for it and who made it!

Sample surveys and opinion polls can be manipulated in several ways.

For example, you can ask the same question in two different tones.

1. "Do you want to punish 16-year olds with jail time similar to the case with adult offenders, if they commit serious offenses? Or should they be sent to special juvenile institutions instead?"

and

2. "Do you think that rapists deserve jail-time, even if they are slightly under the age of 18?"

I am quite sure that the percentage of people agreeing with #2 will be more than #1.

That just means your methodology sucks and that you have no clues about real scientific studies.

Well he's just explaining how a study can be flawed...

He's not saying that all studies are useless and stupid because numbers can be manipulated, he's just saying that each study is influenced by the way it was planned and then by the people behind it paying the scientists conducting the study.

Rather true IMHO

[xslugx]

Science with an agenda is not actual science, it's called politics  Just to let you know 

If we accept research done by the LGBT lobbying groups, then we should also accept the same done by anti-LGBT groups such as various Christian organizations and conservative groups. This is like using the "research" done by Joseph Goebbels in the 1930s to claim that the Jews are an inferior race. LGBT lobbying groups are the new Nazis.

Conservative groups yes, but Christian organizations, well, no.

Bronze age nonsense is where you have to draw the line.

Ahah

Well I say you should accept all and study them.
A good study isn't a study made by an independant organization (there is no such thing) but a study that can be easily criticized, giving precisely the used methodology and the percentage of error.

I think it might be waste of time to analyze Christian studies.  I might be wrong, but I feel whatever they come up with would require you to put bronze age glasses to understand any of it.  These people believe in invisible guy in the sky, crackers that turn into human flesh, wine that turns into blood, and don't get me started on their moral code.  I'm sorry, I'd not listen to studies done by delusional people.

Objective studies, sure.  But studies driven by religious groups by definition are not scientific.

I remember a study asked by religious American about the behaviour of religious children.

They were so full of themselves and so sure that they asked an independant organization to make the study. The study showed that on average religious kids were more violent, less generous and forgived less easily to other people xD

[criptix]

Your statement isn't completely stupid but you're wrong, a study can't be judged only by who paid for it and who made it!

Sample surveys and opinion polls can be manipulated in several ways.

For example, you can ask the same question in two different tones.

1. "Do you want to punish 16-year olds with jail time similar to the case with adult offenders, if they commit serious offenses? Or should they be sent to special juvenile institutions instead?"

and

2. "Do you think that rapists deserve jail-time, even if they are slightly under the age of 18?"

I am quite sure that the percentage of people agreeing with #2 will be more than #1.

That just means your methodology sucks and that you have no clues about real scientific studies.

Well he's just explaining how a study can be flawed...

He's not saying that all studies are useless and stupid because numbers can be manipulated, he's just saying that each study is influenced by the way it was planned and then by the people behind it paying the scientists conducting the study.

Rather true IMHO

I understood that.
And for me it shows either bad methodology and/or the abstinence of objectivity.
Both is a the A and O for a real and good scientific study:

Not biased and be able to reproduced.

[xslugx]

Your statement isn't completely stupid but you're wrong, a study can't be judged only by who paid for it and who made it!

Sample surveys and opinion polls can be manipulated in several ways.

For example, you can ask the same question in two different tones.

1. "Do you want to punish 16-year olds with jail time similar to the case with adult offenders, if they commit serious offenses? Or should they be sent to special juvenile institutions instead?"

and

2. "Do you think that rapists deserve jail-time, even if they are slightly under the age of 18?"

I am quite sure that the percentage of people agreeing with #2 will be more than #1.

That just means your methodology sucks and that you have no clues about real scientific studies.

Well he's just explaining how a study can be flawed...

He's not saying that all studies are useless and stupid because numbers can be manipulated, he's just saying that each study is influenced by the way it was planned and then by the people behind it paying the scientists conducting the study.

Rather true IMHO

I understood that.
And for me it shows either bad methodology and/or the abstinence of objectivity.
Both is a the A and O for a real and good scientific study:

Not biased and be able to reproduced.

Oh ok. I agree then. It's the real point that should be checked before considering a study. Not who made it but has scientific method been respected.