Jackalope wrote:Suddenly they're no longer gay and are humping away! That means....NO GAY ANIMALS!
Cite your sources. We have. It's the only courteous thing to do. Unless you're actually Professor Jackalope ?
---
Alexis, thank you. Couldn't remember which direction the birds did it in. But your right same hole. YUMMY!
AGuSTiN, Site my proof? Sure just look outside at any pair of dogs when one is in heat and you can see it for yourself. What I asked and which has been once agin conveniently forgotten is for these gay animal experts to show what happens when a female in heat is placed in front of the gay animals. No one seems to be able to answer it tho. Wonder why? Maaaaaybe its cause as soon as a gay animal sees a female in heat they are NO LONGER GAY! And that would proove they're wrong and then they wouldn't be famous for finding gay animals. INSTINCT is to reproduce is far too strong for any animal except for man(and women) to ignore.
See NO GAY ANIMALS!
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Jackalope wrote:Alexis, thank you. Couldn't remember which direction the birds did it in. But your right same hole. YUMMY!
AGuSTiN, Site my proof? Sure just look outside at any pair of dogs when one is in heat and you can see it for yourself. What I asked and which has been once agin conveniently forgotten is for these gay animal experts to show what happens when a female in heat is placed in front of the gay animals. No one seems to be able to answer it tho. Wonder why? Maaaaaybe its cause as soon as a gay animal sees a female in heat they are NO LONGER GAY! And that would proove they're wrong and then they wouldn't be famous for finding gay animals. INSTINCT is to reproduce is far too strong for any animal except for man(and women) to ignore.
See NO GAY ANIMALS!
Nevermind Jack. I guess it is asking too much to look beyond your personal observations to dispute scientific study, or to learn how to argue without logical errors. It's impossible to try and impart these good habits to someone who refuses to get it.
---
Geez dude why you gettin all butt hurt? Don't get pissy with me cause you know I'm right. I HAVE argued logicaly with you guys and all you do is ignore what I say and thump on your so called proof as fact when in fact your proof is flawed and when I point out that flaw suddenly I just don't "get it" (shakes head) I thought you were better then this man. All I asked for was what happens to these gay animals when a female in heat is set before them and not only can NONE of you answer me but when I tell you exactly what will happen then YOU say personal observations do not disput scientific study. Well I would like to remind you that SCIENTIFIC STUDY is based soley on observations or did you forget that?
Now for the last time I will ask for any and I do mean ANY research ANY of you can find as to what would happen when a female in season is placed with the gay animals. If such research does not exist then I submit that all of the studies involving gay animals is flawed because noone is addressing this part of it rather only what they want to see.
Or is my arguement to full of "logical errors"?
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Jack: post a link.
I can say I'm God... While you all know I'm
A God I'm not neccesarily
THE God.
However, if someone else can prove I am THE God, and writes it down and publishes it along with the proof, then the proof stands.
I'll put it this way: I have 3 cats, and when they were unaltered, the 2 boys would play with each other (and even hump each other...) and leave the female alone even in heat. Now that they're spayed and neutered, they hate me, and they more or less stick with the same stuff... boys play with each other, girl leaves them be.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
GAM thats what I'm asking you guys for! To post a link ANY link that looked into weather or not gay animals would tag a female in heat.
I think its great you want proof from ME but are unable to provide any of your own. Sorry guys but gay animals just do not exist untill I see some real proof of it.
HEY kinda like the whole argument as to weather or not GOD exists! You guys say provide proof, 100% concrete proof of GODs existance or he's merely something created by our ancestors to explain things they don't understand and that now only those who are weak minded need to rely on the thought that GOD is real. And without that proof there is no GOD. OK I'll buy that argument and I'll resell it to apply to gay animals. PROVE to me 100% beyond a shadow of a doubt that gay animals exist and that they would never have sex with a female in heat. Without such a level of proof then I use your argument back on you that they DO NOT EXIST.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Jackalope wrote:Geez dude why you gettin all butt hurt? Don't get pissy with me cause you know I'm right. I HAVE argued logicaly with you guys and all you do is ignore what I say and thump on your so called proof as fact when in fact your proof is flawed and when I point out that flaw suddenly I just don't "get it" (shakes head) I thought you were better then this man. All I asked for was what happens to these gay animals when a female in heat is set before them and not only can NONE of you answer me but when I tell you exactly what will happen then YOU say personal observations do not disput scientific study. Well I would like to remind you that SCIENTIFIC STUDY is based soley on observations or did you forget that?
Now for the last time I will ask for any and I do mean ANY research ANY of you can find as to what would happen when a female in season is placed with the gay animals. If such research does not exist then I submit that all of the studies involving gay animals is flawed because noone is addressing this part of it rather only what they want to see.
Or is my arguement to full of "logical errors"?
Why do I have to explain how to do everything to you? You're older than me. Lookup logical fallacies and get reading! The fact is your "points" are ignored because they're not even based on a sound, constructive argument. Your personal observation and what you think is the truth is not truth. We've posted link after link, citing experts, and all you have is what-you-think-happens.
Ok ok, I'll do it for you. I'll put it right here so you can't ignore at LEAST this one fallacy that you repeat ad-nauseum...
Argument By Generalization:
drawing a broad conclusion from a small number of perhaps unrepresentative cases. For example, "They say 1 out of every 5 people is Chinese. How is this possible? I know hundreds of people, and none of them is Chinese." So, by generalization, there aren't any Chinese anywhere.
I'll take experts over your personal observations any day of the week. And that's ASSUMING you actually are witness to the behavior of any gay animals.
How am I supposed to refute your "proof"? We've already posted links to experts and research! You haven't! The burder of proof is still on you? Why can't you understand that?
Think of it this way. You're missing $500 from your checking account. You ask your wife if she spent it. She says no. You get the bank record and you see a $500 check written to the hair salon. You ask her again, and she says "No, it's not true." And that's it. Offers no counter documentation of any kind. Do you just believe you must be wrong? Because that's what you're expecting all of us to do based on your word alone.
I'm sorry man, your expert testimony to the behavior of gay animals isn't going to cut it. Especially since I doubt you have even seen 2% of all the animals listed on one of the links that you chose to ignore.
---
Actualy you guys were right my argument wasn't exactly the best to put forth. You guys are smart i forgot just HOW smart while I was away. Yes that was a compliment not a slam as I am trying to play nice
.
I'm gonna propose another way to look at this and this time its a little more along the same lines then my argument about not being able to prove GOD.
Ready or not here we go! Lots of claim to have seen UFO's, there has been TONS of research to support that UFO's are real but still some, or most would argue the proof is wrong, or made up, or the result of swap gas reflecting light from the northern lights (thanks agent "J" of the MIB
) Well I'm of the mind set of those sceptics of the UFO. Sure you can show me proof but I can counter it with simple logic. In fact some of the scientific research done on gay animals I was able to blow out of the water by simply asking "what happens when a female in heat is introduced?" No one seems to be able to answer that yet.
So some scientists say that about 2% of animals are gay. OK fine thats what they claim but what of the animals? We can't talk to them to ask them can we? For example could one of these "experts" on gay animals come up to a dog and ask it if its gay? Sure they can but the animal can't tell them so they have to infer they dog is gay. Well if I observed a man eat only pizza all the time I could infer he didn't like hamburgers but untill I ask him I have no proof right? Same here. Just observing something that we do not fully understand does not make our inferences correct it just makes them out therioes and therioes are up for debate which TA DA is what we're doing here! I have not changed your minds and you have not changed mine. For you these studies are proof enough for me they raise more questions then they answer. And so far I have yet to see the answers to my satisfaction. Sorry I'm a natural born skeptic when it comes to some things and gay animals is one of them it would seem. Doesn't make me wrong or you wrong it just means I need more convincing then you is all. I'm open for that convincing should anyone find the answers to the questions I've asked till then sorry but I don't think so guys.
We have no proof of UFO's cause we have no ET's to talk to. We have no proof of gay animals cause we have none to talk to.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Jack: you can observe behaviour... 2 males or 2 females mating consistently in the wild...
It doesn't require great feats logic to figure it out.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
GAM (The Kilted One) wrote:Jack: you can observe behaviour... 2 males or 2 females mating consistently in the wild...
It doesn't require great feats logic to figure it out.
Ok I was trying not to be crude but since you put it this way. Your gay cats...Did either one actualy stick it up the others ass? Or how about the oral sex part? How many times did you catch your cats blowing each other? Or how about the other gay animals you listed any of them pounding ass? Humping doesn't make them gay its what they do! They hump legs too does that mean the owners are into beastility (sp?)? They'll hump a rock, the'll hump a stuft animal, they'll hump a chair for goodness sakes! NONE of that makes them gay.
Now does it make them gay if they sleep next to each other? Or clean / groom each other? Is that what your calling gay behavior?
Use the same litter box? Wrestle around and play? What is this behavior they exibit that leads you to believe they are gay?
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Did either one actualy stick it up the others ass?
Yes.
Or how about the oral sex part?
Yes.
How many times did you catch your cats blowing each other?
Enough that I kept a spray bottle of water and lemon juice on hand on each floor.
Or how about the other gay animals you listed any of them pounding ass?
They're not outdoor cats, and I have a female that they utterly ignored even when she was in heat.
They never humped anything other than each other. Now that they're fixed, they're at least quiet, but they basically don't deal with the female until food comes around. I realise that homosexuality isn't implied in grooming or horseplay, but they weren't confining themselves to that. A simpleton I'm not.
Look, because you refuse to either read or accept any of the links I posted doesn't make you right, it makes you willingly blind. Homosexuality is not unnatural, it is not against nature and it's not confined to humans. Before you respond back with more silliness, and unproven ideas, at least do me the courtesy of reading at least one or even two of the links I posted, when you respond, back up your ideas with concrete evidence, and link it so it can be read.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Ya know I just realized something....You guys prooved me correct! Thank you! Geez I can't believe I missed it! I said that homosexuals were not the norm and then all the little tangents were thrown in but I missed it! I was sitting here watching TV and it hit me....less then 2% of all animals are thought to be gay is what YOU said, its what your experts said. So less then 2% leaves more then 98% so that means ITS NOT NORMAL! Normal would be somewhere close to 50% but less then 2%? Nope not normal! Damn all this time I'm sitting here trying to show its not normal and you say as much yourselves! You guys are awesome! THANK YOU so much for prooving my argument for me!
You guys! (gives E-nuggies to GAM and AGuSTiN) I tell you, your the best!
I'm not responding back with anything other then what you have said to me here. No siliness, no unprooved statments, no tricks or slight of hand was needed on my part you did it all for me!
God its been too long since I argued with you guys on I would have seen it right away! LOL! Less then 2% is normal! LMAO! You guys are great! When I realized what you said and then contridicted yourselves I got such a good laugh! Thanks guys I needed that.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
So, if I may paraphrase, Homosexuals are freaks and not normal because they partake in an act that is considered contrary to the well-being of the specie...
Then that means anyone who identifies with a political party must be a freak as well
Goodbye Callisto & Skađi, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Jackalope wrote:Ya know I just realized something....You guys prooved me correct! Thank you! Geez I can't believe I missed it! I said that homosexuals were not the norm and then all the little tangents were thrown in but I missed it! I was sitting here watching TV and it hit me....less then 2% of all animals are thought to be gay is what YOU said, its what your experts said. So less then 2% leaves more then 98% so that means ITS NOT NORMAL! Normal would be somewhere close to 50% but less then 2%? Nope not normal! Damn all this time I'm sitting here trying to show its not normal and you say as much yourselves! You guys are awesome! THANK YOU so much for prooving my argument for me!
You guys! (gives E-nuggies to GAM and AGuSTiN) I tell you, your the best!
I'm not responding back with anything other then what you have said to me here. No siliness, no unprooved statments, no tricks or slight of hand was needed on my part you did it all for me!
God its been too long since I argued with you guys on I would have seen it right away! LOL! Less then 2% is normal! LMAO! You guys are great! When I realized what you said and then contridicted yourselves I got such a good laugh! Thanks guys I needed that.
Really, that's the best you have left? In humans alone, 2% is 100,000,000 people out of 5 billion. Only 12 countries in the whole world have a bigger population.
http://www.photius.com/wfb1999/rankings/population_0.html
It's MORE abnormal to be German, British or Canadian.
---
Knoxfire wrote:AGuSTiN wrote:
It's MORE abnormal to be German, British or Canadian.
MUCH more abnormal.
Duh... Hello captain obvious!! Everyone knows that Germans, Brittians, and Canadians are sub-human freaks of nature... and yet we accept them anyways.
I just think that that anyone who can accept demi-humans like that, certainly should have no problem accepting Adam and Steve
I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?
Jack: the point is that homosexuals are not "freaks of nature." What is popular, and what is conventional does not rate.
Homosexuals don't choose to be homosexual, they are by biology... It's that way across species.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Didn't watch it, Alex, but if the last three characters of the link are any indication, i'm betting it's the scene near the end of Top Secret where the guy takes it in the poopchute by the bull.
Goodbye Callisto & Skađi, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
I watched it. Are those male "pair bonds" accompanied by a female really in a "sexual" relationship? They still mate with a female and produce offspring. This is more of a hetero relationship it seems to me. Both males mate with the female and the goslings have the benefit of three parents. That does not look like a homosexual relationship to me.
The female pairings seem to be one of convenience also.
PAX
Nah not the best I have AGuSTiN I was just showing how you made my point for me that homosexuality is NOT the norm. But like I said if it makes them happy then by all means, have at it.
As for gay aminals I fund a couple links that have experts saying they aren't sure what it is but they can't label it as being gay. Here ya go guys, like I said its different behaiviors that can be mistaken for homosexuality but even has some experts stumped.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html
Thats NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC! Their experts say they're not so sure its homosexual behaivor. BUT this article here is one of my favorites! Says gay animals don't exist! (see guys I can find links too
)
http://www.moralhealth.com/blog/_archives/2007/1/5/2621932.html
Even ask Yahoo isn't so sure if gay animal sexist. (Hey GAM they said just cause Fido humps your leg doesn't mean hes gay
)
http://ask.yahoo.com/20060919.html
And I even called my vet to ask him about your gay cats GAM, he laughed. He explained to me that the reason they weren't interested in the female was because she was brought into the home after the males had been there and established it as there's. Basicly she was an outsider and as he explained cats a very stand offish animals that prefer to live solitary lives but that us people force them to live together. As for the anal sex he said he HIGHLY doubts it. he went on to explain that male cats have barbs on the part of the penis that enters its mate. Those barbs make sure the female will not try to run oce the sex has started because its PAINFUL for her if she does and that ever time the male pulls out to thrust in the barbs dig into his mate causeing the fimilier howling and screaming of the female while the mating is underway. Those barbs mean a male cat WOULD NOT ENJOY another male cats penis in his butt and WOULD NEVER in my vets professional opinion allow it to happen. The oral sex he dismissed as grooming and said it was silly to even ask since no cats he has ever seen or heard of exhibit such behaivior. So GAM sleep well in the knowledge your cats are not gay. BUT they can be pissed at you for getting them fixed so late in life as they know they are missing something and probly blame you. Sorry bud.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
I'm so happy, Jackalope did RESEARCH!! ((golf clap))
I just the the Neo Geo article and I didn't see anything about them questioning whether it's homosexual behavior. Matter of fact, they stated..
"Roy and Silo, two male chinstrap penguins at New York's Central Park Zoo have been inseparable for six years now. They display classic pair-bonding behavior—entwining of necks, mutual preening, flipper flapping, and the rest. They also have sex, while ignoring potential female mates."
Which kind of blows your own earlier argument out of the water.
The second link doesn't question the existence of gay animals. It questions using gay animals to justify human gay behavior. It says so in the second paragraph,
"Good science makes it abundantly clear that anthropomorphizing is quite bad science. The issue is this: What might we infer about human beings from animal behavior? The answer is not much. "
Which is fine.. except this whole thread is whether it's abnormal on a biological level, not a moral level, which is what that site is about based on it's own URL.
The Yahoo URL is answered in a very kind of "I don't know for sure, but here are some links". It's not an authoritive resource.
So while you looked some things of Jackie, you didn't exactly read them very well.
I'll give you a C- for effort.
---
^ ^ ^ Ah selective reading at its very finest. And as for Roy and Silo, if they're so gay how do they have babies with that little female?
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
