Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (31399)	11/10/2006 2:46:22 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541368

but I don't agree with you on the quantification aspect. The point is not to accurately pigeonhole each individual, but to track change in homosexuality over time. I don't care if the "true" incidence is 1%, 3% or 10%. It is somewhere down there. The question is: Is there any significant affect on incidence rate as a result of social changes? BTW, studies of homosexuality are currently going on using animals, and I have yet to see any researcher raise your objection to such data. Now in the case of animals, the researchers observe their behaviour in order to label them, whereas we have a tendency with humans to ask them, which suffers from the problem of deception or denial. Perhaps applying observational techniques would be a more reliable means of doing human social studies in general, although it raises certain moral issues of its own.