Some of us know that homosexuals has nothing to do with genetic. Those who are trying to link homosexuality to genetic or whatever, are evil and if the US and some other nations have legalized it does not mean we should do th ... read full comment
Some of us know that homosexuals has nothing to do with genetic. Those who are trying to link homosexuality to genetic or whatever, are evil and if the US and some other nations have legalized it does not mean we should do the same.
Look at the history of the US. The first question we should ask ourselves is, where are the natives whose land was forcefully taken away? They are nowhere to be found and it seems those people were "agents of Satan" who should be eliminated at all cost and what did they do to be treated as such?
The same people who went to Africa and through some "systematic adjustment" engaged in slavery that saw millions of some innocent humans in the "so-called" new world who went through all sort of inhumane treatment. As we speak, these people are still fighting for recognition despite producing their first president. The US should not be taken serious because they are the perpetrators of all the vices that is gradually eroding moral fiber of our dear world.
Homosexuality is nothing more than "a new way of life" in the Western hemisphere. Those who have summoned that on themselves are seen as rich who have it all but what is their future? Any government who will pushed for its acceptance in Ghana, will be met with all our might and strength.
DR JONES 8 years ago
IT IS NOT SEXUAL ORIENTATION, IT IS A PSYCHO-SEXUAL DISORDER, JUST LIKE OTHER SEXUAL DISORDERS. THERE IS NO GENETIC PROOF OF GAYNESS. IT IS PURELY HORMONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL. THE GAY LOBBY IS TRYING HARD TO CHANGE WHAT PSYCHO ... read full comment
IT IS NOT SEXUAL ORIENTATION, IT IS A PSYCHO-SEXUAL DISORDER, JUST LIKE OTHER SEXUAL DISORDERS. THERE IS NO GENETIC PROOF OF GAYNESS. IT IS PURELY HORMONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL. THE GAY LOBBY IS TRYING HARD TO CHANGE WHAT PSYCHOLOGISTS HAVE KNOWN FOR LONG.
HOMOSEXUALITY IS A DISORDER.
dadwene 8 years ago
Well said Dr Jones
Well said Dr Jones
Tekonline.org 8 years ago
It is now well-established that the sex hormones play a role in gender identity and development (see the abstract at the bottom).
The so-called Neuro-Hormonal Theory posits that even though the X and Y chromosomes determi ... read full comment
It is now well-established that the sex hormones play a role in gender identity and development (see the abstract at the bottom).
The so-called Neuro-Hormonal Theory posits that even though the X and Y chromosomes determine the primary gender, it is the sex hormone influence on the brain that determines the development of the sex organs and gender identity.
Like almost everything biological, evolutionary forces have a hand in this matter. One theory suggests that nature tends to favor the survival of pregnancy against proper gender development.
Since the female sex hormones (particularly, estrogen and progesterone) are essential for successful pregnancy, nature tends to overproduce these hormones ON OCCASION. If the overproduction happens to occur in a male fetus, gender identity would most likely be compromised.
In any case, there is strong scientific evidence to support the fact that the sex hormones act on the brain to influence gender development.
Trends in Cognitive Science. 2010 Oct;14(10):448-56. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2010.07.005. Epub 2010 Aug 18.
Sex-related variation in human behavior and the brain.
Hines M1.
Abstract
Male and female fetuses differ in testosterone concentrations beginning as early as week 8 of gestation. This early hormone difference exerts permanent influences on brain development and behavior. Contemporary research shows that hormones are particularly important for the development of sex-typical childhood behavior, including toy choices, which until recently were thought to result solely from sociocultural influences. Prenatal testosterone exposure also appears to influence sexual orientation and gender identity, as well as some, but not all, sex-related cognitive, motor and personality characteristics. Neural mechanisms responsible for these hormone-induced behavioral outcomes are beginning to be identified, and current evidence suggests involvement of the hypothalamus and amygdala, as well as interhemispheric connectivity, and cortical areas involved in visual processing.
===========================================================================
Endocrine Develeopment. 2010;17:22-35. doi: 10.1159/000262525. Epub 2009 Nov 24.
Sexual hormones and the brain: an essential alliance for sexual identity and sexual orientation.
Garcia-Falgueras A1, Swaab DF.
Abstract
The fetal brain develops during the intrauterine period in the male direction through a direct action of testosterone on the developing nerve cells, or in the female direction through the absence of this hormone surge. In this way, our gender identity (the conviction of belonging to the male or female gender) and sexual orientation are programmed or organized into our brain structures when we are still in the womb. However, since sexual differentiation of the genitals takes place in the first two months of pregnancy and sexual differentiation of the brain starts in the second half of pregnancy, these two processes can be influenced independently, which may result in extreme cases in trans-sexuality. This also means that in the event of ambiguous sex at birth, the degree of masculinization of the genitals may not reflect the degree of masculinization of the brain. There is no indication that social environment after birth has an effect on gender identity or sexual orientation.
member of the jury 8 years ago
Thanks for providing some helpful scientific insights into the reasons why there is diversity in gender identity and sexual orientation amongst human populations everywhere, including Ghana.
Thanks for providing some helpful scientific insights into the reasons why there is diversity in gender identity and sexual orientation amongst human populations everywhere, including Ghana.
francis kwarteng 8 years ago
Dear Tekonline.org,
How are you?
I quite remember reading somewhere that some scientists involved involved in monitoring animals for same-sex or homosexual tendencies regulated/manipulated the experimental animals' hor ... read full comment
Dear Tekonline.org,
How are you?
I quite remember reading somewhere that some scientists involved involved in monitoring animals for same-sex or homosexual tendencies regulated/manipulated the experimental animals' hormones to see their corresponding effects on their sexual behavior.
LaGard Smith's book "Sodom Second Coming (1993)" covers some of the controversies surrounding the connection between genes and homosexuality depending on who is doting the interpretation of scientific data.
One group of scientists see homosexuality in the human genome, another group of scientists look at the same data but see things differently.
I will not say mush further because I read this book during my UST days and therefore the science today as explored in the book might not be as it used to be then. Let me also say the author Smith is a Christain.
This is not to say I support it or otherwise. There are more important things on my mind that sexuality identity!
Those whose hormonal resources were manipulated demonstrated homosexual tendencies. On the other hand Dr. Francis Collins, one of the pillars behind the Human Genome Project, has this ambiguous take on human genomics and homsexuality (DR. COLLINS IS A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN; IT IS IRONIC HOW DR. BEN CARSON, ANOTHER CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN AND A NEUROSURGEON, SEES NOTHING GENETIC ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY HAS NOT; HE SAYS IT IS A LIFESTYLE. I guess the differences in their professional backgrounds by way of academic/scientific may have something to do with their divergent positions on genes/homosexuality):
........................................................................................................................................................
What did Francis Collins really say about homosexuality?
September 30, 2008 by Warren Throckmorton 31 Comments
In his book, The Language of God: A scientist presents evidence for belief, Francis Collins has this to say about homosexuality on page 260:
An area of particularly strong public interest is the genetic basis of homosexuality. Evidence from twin studies does in fact support the conclusion that heritable factors play a role in male homosexuality. However, the likelihood that the identical twin of a homosexual male will also be gay is about 20% (compared with 2-4 percent of males in the general population), indicating that sexual orientation is genetically influenced but not hardwired by DNA, and that whatever genes are involved represent predispositions, not predeterminations.
On the web, there are a number of sources who have quoted the OneNewsNow report that Francis Collins said the following:
‘Homosexuality is not hardwired. There is no gay gene. We mapped the human genome. We now know there is no genetic cause for homosexuality.’”
The problem is – Dr. Collins did not say this. As I noted here, Dr. Collins confirmed to me that he did not make this statement. He did say this:
It troubles me greatly to learn that anything I have written would cause anguish for you or others who are seeking answers to the basis of homosexuality. The words quoted by NARTH all come from the Appendix to my book “The Language of God” (pp. 260-263), but have been juxtaposed in a way that suggests a somewhat different conclusion that I intended. I would urge anyone who is concerned about the meaning to refer back to the original text.
The evidence we have at present strongly supports the proposition that there are hereditary factors in male homosexuality — the observation that an identical twin of a male homosexual has approximately a 20% likelihood of also being gay points to this conclusion, since that is 10 times the population incidence. But the fact that the answer is not 100% also suggests that other factors besides DNA must be involved. That certainly doesn’t imply, however, that those other undefined factors are inherently alterable.
Your note indicated that your real interest is in the truth. And this is about all that we really know. No one has yet identified an actual gene that contributes to the hereditary component (the reports about a gene on the X chromosome from the 1990s have not held up), but it is likely that such genes will be found in the next few years.
Note this part of the quote: “That certainly doesn’t imply, however, that those other undefined factors are inherently alterable.” Sexual attractions may come from the operation of several factors, in different ways for different people. The nature of the cause however, does not directly lead to understanding of how alterable the attractions might be. Perhaps attractions develop with some mix of environment and pre-natal factors. However, once set, attractions for most people seem to be pretty durable.
Go here for the entire post describing the confusion over what Collins said.
........................................................................................................................................................
Tekonline.org 8 years ago
Good Day, Francis.
I haven't been paying much attention to the controversies you outlined. The science is complex enough without straying into other areas.
The overwhelming majority of scientists care ONLY about reliable ... read full comment
Good Day, Francis.
I haven't been paying much attention to the controversies you outlined. The science is complex enough without straying into other areas.
The overwhelming majority of scientists care ONLY about reliable data and nothing else. The peer-review process is international in scope, is devoid of political, religious, or cultural influences and indeed works very well.
As to whether gender identity is genetically-determined or not is not that simple to explain. In most biological processes, there are both genetic and environmental components.
A case in point is breast cancer. A percent of cases involve the BRCA gene variants (and more genes are being discovered). But, there are also cases involving estrogen therapy, environmental toxins, viruses, and even just plain spontaneous mutation of genes or abnormal protein folding. This is complexity at its best!
Another example is the terrible neurodegenerative disease called "Lou Gehrig's Disease" (amyotropic lateral sclerosis or ALS), which attacks the motor neurons of the brain. (The famous astrophysicist Stephen Hawking suffers from that). The cause of ALS is still not fully understood although TEN PERCENT of patients have abnormal genes as the cause.
There are many other disorders in which both genetic and environmental factors play a role.
Looking broadly at the role of evolution in gender identity, you can also see how nature often struggles with hard choices.
Generally-speaking, biology is all about the SURVIVAL OF THE SPECIES.
And in the case of gender identity, there seems to be a conflict.
On the one hand, the species MUST survive. Which means males MUST mate with females and generate offspring. (males cannot mate with males to produce offspring).
On the other hand, the fetus MUST survive. The pregnancy MUST succeed, going full-term without any miscarriage or still-birth. So the body floods the expectant mother's body with female hormones (needed for successful pregnancy). If too much is produced, they compete with the male hormones or cause feedback inhibition of testosterone, thereby altering gender identity (the absence or presence of testosterone in the fetal brain largely determines gender identity).
Very recent fMRI data have also shown physical differences in some brain structures between straights and homosexuals.
Needless to say, there is still plenty of scientific work to be done, and my humble advice to you is to try to get your scientific information from reliable sources such as PUBMED or PUBMED CENTRAL (www.pubmed.org).
Have a nice day.
DR JONES 8 years ago
I WONDER WHY BEING SEXUALLY ATTRACTED TO A CORPSE OR A DOLL OR AN BABY IS NOT CONSIDERED SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
IS SEXUAL ATTRACTION CALLED SEXUAL ORIENTATION WHEN IT IS HARMLESS? WHEN A MAN IS ATTRACTED TO A BABY, SEXUALLY, ... read full comment
I WONDER WHY BEING SEXUALLY ATTRACTED TO A CORPSE OR A DOLL OR AN BABY IS NOT CONSIDERED SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
IS SEXUAL ATTRACTION CALLED SEXUAL ORIENTATION WHEN IT IS HARMLESS? WHEN A MAN IS ATTRACTED TO A BABY, SEXUALLY, BECAUSE IT IS HARMFUL, IT IS CALLED A DISORDER. WHEN A MAN IS ATTRACTED TO ANOTHER ADULT MALE, BECAUSE IT IS HARMLESS TO BOTH PARTIES, IT IS CALLED SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
IF WE HAVE TO CALL HOMOSEXUALITY SEXUAL ORIENTATION, THEN ALL SEXUAL ATTRACTIONS HAVE TO BE CALLED ORIENTATION. THE LABEL SEXUAL DISORDER HAS TO BE COMPLETED ELIMINATED, EVEN IN THE CASE OF A PERSON HAVING SEXUAL ATTRACTION FOR ANIMALS OR A BABY/CHILD.
Tekonline.org 8 years ago
The phenomenon in question is gender disorder as mediated by SEX HORMONES.
The situations you cited have never been observed in studies involving the sex hormones.
This topic is excellently covered in the ongoing Brain ... read full comment
The phenomenon in question is gender disorder as mediated by SEX HORMONES.
The situations you cited have never been observed in studies involving the sex hormones.
This topic is excellently covered in the ongoing Brain Series on the Charlie Rose show, featuring the Nobel Prize winning neuroscientist Dr Eric Kandel and other brain science heavyweights:
www.charlierose.com/watch/60578677
DR JONES 8 years ago
GAYS WOULD REALLY BE UPSET THAT U CALL WHAT THEY ARE A DISORDER. GAYS SAY IT IS NOT A DISORDER. ACTUALLY, THEY CLAIM IF BEING GAY IS A DISORDER, THEN IT MEANS BEING HETERO IS THE ORDER OR THE NORM. THEY CLAIM THERE IS NO ORD ... read full comment
GAYS WOULD REALLY BE UPSET THAT U CALL WHAT THEY ARE A DISORDER. GAYS SAY IT IS NOT A DISORDER. ACTUALLY, THEY CLAIM IF BEING GAY IS A DISORDER, THEN IT MEANS BEING HETERO IS THE ORDER OR THE NORM. THEY CLAIM THERE IS NO ORDER, THAT SEXUAL ATTRACTION IS FLUID AND ENCOMPASSES ALL ORIENTATIONS.
Tekonline.org 8 years ago
It is not exactly a "disorder" in the true sense of the word. It is only with regard to the Darwinian evolutionary purpose of having XX organisms attracted to XY beings.
Androgen hormones receptors exist in the brain (a f ... read full comment
It is not exactly a "disorder" in the true sense of the word. It is only with regard to the Darwinian evolutionary purpose of having XX organisms attracted to XY beings.
Androgen hormones receptors exist in the brain (a fact that has been known for many years). The Darwinian purpose is to direct the male to the female in order for mating to occur. If the brain fails to accomplish this then it becomes a disorder. Being in love wouldn't be adequate.
In monkeys, the female buttocks swell prominently during ovulation. The visual cortex of the male monkey brain has been programmed by testosterone to recognize and respond to such females in behaviors that ultimately leads to mating and procreation. That IS the purpose of sex hormones influencing the brain. Any deviation from that purpose can be considered an evolutionary aberration.
It is quite conceivable that different brain structures are responsible for an XY organism falling in love with another XY organism (rather than with an XX organism). The question is, what would be the evolutionary BENEFIT of such a romantic tie-up?
Tekonline.org 8 years ago
Sorry I was in a rush and couldn't proofread as well as conclude.
The concluding point was, in terms of procreation to help the species survive, one could call it a disorder, but for achieving just a romantic union it woul ... read full comment
Sorry I was in a rush and couldn't proofread as well as conclude.
The concluding point was, in terms of procreation to help the species survive, one could call it a disorder, but for achieving just a romantic union it would seem perfectly normal.
francis kwarteng 8 years ago
Dear Tekonline.org,
Good day.
II checked www.TheGreatCourses.com. Great website.
Thanks.
Dear Tekonline.org,
Good day.
II checked www.TheGreatCourses.com. Great website.
Thanks.
francis kwarteng 8 years ago
Dear Teckonline.org,
I just this and decided to respond to it. Thanks for your comments anyway.
I am familiar with PUMMED (PUNMBED CENTRAL) but unfortunately not everything that is published there that is accepted in th ... read full comment
Dear Teckonline.org,
I just this and decided to respond to it. Thanks for your comments anyway.
I am familiar with PUMMED (PUNMBED CENTRAL) but unfortunately not everything that is published there that is accepted in the international scientific community.
I used this platform (PUBMED) in some of my biology classes (general biology, anatomy & physiology, biochemistry, genetics, etc).
I have also ocassionally taken advantage of the US Library of Science (National Institute of Health), the New England Journal of Medicine, the American Journal of Neuroscience among others.
As you can see I am familiar with some of top neuroscience platforms in the world. These are some of the platforms some of whose publications I still discuss with one of my former American biology professor (New York).
Thus, I am familiar with the larger scope of the controversies surrounding the data on the topic you and others are discussing.
There is no "consensus" in the international scientific community on some of the subject matter being discussed here on this forum.
Even more interesting, there are prominent geneticists today who do not share the scientific conclusions reached in connection with the human genome project. Scientific papers have been published in the PUBMED (and other respected peer-reviwed journals on neuroscience and genetics) on this very question.
The question is entirely different if it comes to some of the "minor" or "basic" biology (neuroscience) you are sharing with others on this forum, the implications of this basic or biology can be enormous in terms of hormonal expressions and sexual behavior.
And don't forget that Dr. Francis Collins is one of the finest and most authoritative geneticists on the planet today.
I may have to add that I mentioned Smith's book "Sodom's Second Coming" just to resuurrect the controversy regarding the "discovery" of the so-called "gay gene" on the X-chromosome, which Dr. Collins discounted based on his work on the human genome project (though he also said more discoveries are likely to be made in the future).
Finally, when I said I the science must have changed today, I was merely implying I wanted to hear something new in neuroscience and genetics (and sexuality) that I have not heard before.
The 1990's alleged discovery of the so-called "gay gene" on the X-chromosome and Dr. Collins' discounting of the same in the 2000s is one example. Dr. Collins has been influential in the international scientific community.
Another example: All the information you have provided here are nothing new. They are staples in basic biology, neuroscience, and genetics. I think you understand what I am saying!
Some of the data are merely re-interpretation of old data given advancement in reserach technology. Geneticists and biochemsist such as Dr. Craig Venter human genome sequencing and innovative global ocean sampling expeditions have expanded our understanding on the complexity of nature, our biological existence.
I came across Venter in my marine biology class and in PUBMED. Finally, both Venter and Collins are the primary force behind the human genome project.
In sum, I am familiar with some of the most respected reserach institutions and peer-reviewed journals (SCIENCE, PUBMED, NATURE, etc) in the field we are discussing here today!
And thus I want to hear new material rather that what is being discussed on this forum.
fact, some of the profound scientific ideas expressed here on this forum on neuroscience, genetics, hormone biology (the endocrine system), neurospychology, etc., are nothing "new" really if one has been follwing these questions in the past two or three decades!
Have a great day.
Thanks.
Tekonline.org 8 years ago
Hello Francis, well all you have to do, is to pick one study, and debate the DATA. Tell us how the data is problematic. That's how scientists deal with issues.
I think you tend to dwell too much in OPINIONS. In science, y ... read full comment
Hello Francis, well all you have to do, is to pick one study, and debate the DATA. Tell us how the data is problematic. That's how scientists deal with issues.
I think you tend to dwell too much in OPINIONS. In science, you can have a hundred Nobel Prizes in Medicine,and still, your opinion wouldn't matter as much as REAL DATA!
francis kwarteng 8 years ago
Dear Tekonline.org,
My preoccupation is not opinion per se.
It is interpretation of a given set of data. Not all scientists see data in the same way. I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT OPINION.
I wish I could easily locate for ... read full comment
Dear Tekonline.org,
My preoccupation is not opinion per se.
It is interpretation of a given set of data. Not all scientists see data in the same way. I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT OPINION.
I wish I could easily locate for you how different groups of prominent scientists interpret and continue to interpret some of the major data on the human genome project, to mention but one.
There are plenty examples to illustrate. But that should be a topic for another day.
Finally, if it is a matter of opinion I will not be here on this forum. Remember some of the data you (and others) have provided on this forum are "hardcore" biological data, not opinion.
Like I said before, what I what to learn on this forum about neuroscience, homones (the endocrine system), genetics, etc., today is "new" and "innovative" data on ssexuality, neuroscience, evolutionary Darwinism, neuropsychology on human/animal sexuality, not opinions.
Perhaps I should be able to retrieve empirical facts of the issues I am raising here, the different interpretations of the same set of scientific data, from Pubmed, Science, Nature, and other platforms I have discussed elsewhere and with my professors (including my own findings based on accessing these respected platforms).
So my primary concern is not necessarily about scientific opinions. Rather, it is about interpretation of the data and why some scientists see the same.
I am not also particularly interested in whether a scientist is a Nobel Laureate or not. At least Dr. Collins statment on sexuality is based on his work on the sequencing of human genome.
He has provided scientific "data" on this (in addition to opinion). But it's the data from the sequencing of the human genome that is of primary interest to him as a geneticist/scientist. It is the same data I am interested in.
Sometimes scientific opinion and data interpretation overlap. It happens all the time.
This is not to say Dr. Collins' "hard" data on sexuality, genetics (sequencing of human genome), etc., conflates opinion and data interpretation. He always makes sure to separate the two.
He even goes further to provide mathematical confirmations on his scientific positions (you may call it "mathematical genetics" and genetic algebra").
Let's wait and see what I can make out of this in the future when time is my side.
Thanks.
Tekonline.org 8 years ago
The Scientific Methodology pays particular attention to standard data interpretation via STATISTICS (a subject I'm sure as a mathematician you know too well). Without that science would have gone nowhere, as the same data see ... read full comment
The Scientific Methodology pays particular attention to standard data interpretation via STATISTICS (a subject I'm sure as a mathematician you know too well). Without that science would have gone nowhere, as the same data seen by 1000 scientists could result in 1000 interpretations !
YOU SAID:
"...Perhaps I should be able to retrieve empirical facts of the issues I am raising here, the different interpretations of the same set of scientific data, from Pubmed, Science, Nature, and other platforms I have discussed elsewhere and with my professors (including my own findings based on accessing these respected platforms)..."
Yes, I would like to see the empirical facts. And hopeful, you go through The Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine OFTEN enough to spot all the new fMRI data on sexuality coming out!
You would be surprised how much recent stuff is out there!
francis kwarteng 8 years ago
Yes,
You can begin by reading Lancet, Science, Nature, Pubmed, etc., and you should find empirical examples of what I am talking about.
Some of the examples I am talking come specifically from Lancet and the New Englan ... read full comment
Yes,
You can begin by reading Lancet, Science, Nature, Pubmed, etc., and you should find empirical examples of what I am talking about.
Some of the examples I am talking come specifically from Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine.
I am surprised you have not come across any examples if you access these journals.
Well, I will do this in the future as time allows. You should also bring any to my attention when you find one. Like I said to you before, plenty examples exist.
And you need not bother because I have been following the debate in the past two decades.
I am aware of "how much recebnt stuff is out there there." Remember I mentioned some of my former New York-based biology professors to you.
One of them sits on the editorial board of one of these respected journals. He is the one who still forwards to me publications he thinks I should know about.
Some of these publications cover medical science/research, biology, clinical trials, pharmacology/pharmacogenomics, neuroscience, suxuality, psychology/psychiatry, genetics, molecular biology, marine biology (I studied Dr. Craig Venter in his class), evolutionary theory, plant biology (my former professor has one master's in plant biology), and myriad topics.
The conversation I am having with you now is one that I have had with him in and out of his class (and occasionally in the past couple of years). Let me rest my case now to take care of other matters.
Good day.
Thanks.
Tekonline.org 8 years ago
"...I am aware of "how much recebnt stuff is out there there." Remember I mentioned some of my former New York-based biology professors to you.
One of them sits on the editorial board of one of these respected journals. He ... read full comment
"...I am aware of "how much recebnt stuff is out there there." Remember I mentioned some of my former New York-based biology professors to you.
One of them sits on the editorial board of one of these respected journals. He is the one who still forwards to me publications he thinks I should know about..."
And you still couldn't cite a single recent finding, Francis?
Anyway, enjoy your weekend!
francis kwarteng 8 years ago
Tekonline.org,
Don't worry.
This was the same problem I had last year when I was asked on Ghanaweb to produce evidence supporting my claim that Wole Soyinka did base his play "Kongi's Harvest" on Kwame Nkrumah.
Yes ... read full comment
Tekonline.org,
Don't worry.
This was the same problem I had last year when I was asked on Ghanaweb to produce evidence supporting my claim that Wole Soyinka did base his play "Kongi's Harvest" on Kwame Nkrumah.
Yes, it took me many months (seven months or so) to finally get hold of the precise sources I intended for my reading audience.
And when I did this year, I ended up writing three essays based on those sources. But I have to go through literaly thousands of sources (books, scholarly papers, talk to tens of my friends who are literature professors and literature students, go through my personal library here in the state I live now and to contact my brother who keeps part of my library collections in New York, etc) to get what I realy wanted.
You have no idea how many science journal publications (read/unread) I stilll have sitting in my email. I literally cannot place a cap on them.
This is why I have to do this in the future if time is on my side. I just don't want to give you mere examples. I want to give you entire papers to read. I can't recall any titles for now. And there are plenty examples (papers) on this.
Thanks.
Tekonline.org 8 years ago
It takes just a few seconds to find articles using the search button on Eurekalert.org
It takes just a few seconds to find articles using the search button on Eurekalert.org
francis kwarteng 8 years ago
Tekonline.org,
I have just sent you one on one of the problems which p-value poses in the biological sciences, particualrly, as far as interpretation of data is concerned (Lancet paper).
Thanks for bringing up p-value a ... read full comment
Tekonline.org,
I have just sent you one on one of the problems which p-value poses in the biological sciences, particualrly, as far as interpretation of data is concerned (Lancet paper).
Thanks for bringing up p-value and the controversies surroining it in the mathematical and biological sciences.
I think I have said enough for today.
Have a great day.
Thanks.
francis kwarteng 8 years ago
Tekonline.org,
In my rush to reply to your email I forgot to mention this fact:
Part of the problem I am talking about is itself caused by statistics, probability, mathematical modeling, time series analysis, etc. in aa ... read full comment
Tekonline.org,
In my rush to reply to your email I forgot to mention this fact:
Part of the problem I am talking about is itself caused by statistics, probability, mathematical modeling, time series analysis, etc. in aa field such as genetics and chaos theory, particularly probability/stochastic models.
Thanks.
Tekonline.org 8 years ago
In most biological studies, the P-value is more than enough to make scientists accept data if the experimental methodology is valid.
In most biological studies, the P-value is more than enough to make scientists accept data if the experimental methodology is valid.
francis kwarteng 8 years ago
Tekonline.org,
And you think p-value has not limitations?
Epidemiologists encounter the limitations of p-value almost everyday!
Again, this should be a topic for another day if we should extend the limitations of p ... read full comment
Tekonline.org,
And you think p-value has not limitations?
Epidemiologists encounter the limitations of p-value almost everyday!
Again, this should be a topic for another day if we should extend the limitations of p-value beyond epidemiology to other fields (the limitations of p-value is probably more encountered in the field of biology---molecular biology and medicine, clinical trials, say).
Remember p-value merely deals with measuring randomness (probability, variability, & likelihood of events) and does not necessarily "capture" the behavior of every single event in randomness all the time.
Thus, statistical inferences has limitations when it comes to significant tests. I will say that p-value generally gives us something CLOSE to "truth." P-value does not predict certainty.
The "failure" of p-value to predict "certainty" accounts for some of the major interpretation conundrums I have been talking about.
That is why some mathematicians/bio-statisticians, statisticians, and bio-mathematicians sometimes use Bayes factor/confidence interval, likelihood ratios for a number of technical/conceptual reasons I can't get into now.
Yet all have their limitations. This is what I have been saying: Lancet, Pubmed, Center for Disease Control and Prevention, etc., all have papers on the shortcomings/limitations on p-value, significance tesing hypothesis, etc.
You should read the Lancet piece "The Uptake of Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis, Sexual Parctices, And HIV Incidence In Men And Transgender Women Who Have Sex With Men: A Cohort Study" (infectious disease (Lancet); Grant and Co).
I can go and on and on (if I can easily locate the exact scientific papers I have in mind in my email)...In sum, statistics, probability (stochastic models and measurable statistic such as p-value) underscore some of the problems I have been discussing with you.
Please do not bank all your hopes on p-value. I can only say at this point that it is one of the best tools we have. Don't get me wrong.
Data interpretation in science, especially biology disciplines, would have pushed science ahead if we can reliably eliminate some of the "errors" p-value (and probability) introduces into data interpretation.
P-value and precision are not likely allies. P-value merely approximates.
Thanks.
member of the jury 8 years ago
The problem with the search for truth lies with right wing evangelicals, Orthodox patriarchs, some African bishops (but not the wonderful Desmond Tutu).
These well meaning but wrong minded people maintain the Bible is intr ... read full comment
The problem with the search for truth lies with right wing evangelicals, Orthodox patriarchs, some African bishops (but not the wonderful Desmond Tutu).
These well meaning but wrong minded people maintain the Bible is intrinsically anti-homosexual.
They say it clearly condemns homosexuality as a sin, an abomination, even that Jesus hated gays. But do the Biblical sources say these things?
In the tens of thousands of verses that make up the Bible, ‘homosexuality’ is, for the sake of argument, mentioned six times.
These brief but much quoted passages are by no means clear and would have been lost amid the enormity of wider Biblical narratives were it not for a determined anti-homosexual agenda.
First up, there’s the conflation of homosexuals with ‘Sodomites’, the inhabitants of the city of Sodom destroyed by God in Genesis. Early Church commentators, such as the fourth century Patriarch of Constantinople, John Chrysostom, interpreted Sodom’s sin to be specifically homosexual acts, which, incidentally, he believed were ‘worse than murder’.
Yet whenever Sodom’s actually mentioned in the Bible it’s only in the context that the Sodomites, suspicious of strangers, sought to do violence towards them. It was that breech of the laws of hospitality that made God send the thunderstorm to end all thunderstorms.
Passages in Deuteronomy, Leviticus and Paul’s first letter to the Romans routinely get trotted out as evidence of God’s murderous intent.
But the surprising truth is that early Christian translators of the Bible sexed up these texts. They inserted, omitted and mistranslated words and phrases in order to bulk up a case for persecution.
A recent translation of Deuteronomy reads ‘there shall be no… sodomite of the sons of Israel’. But the original Hebrew does no such thing. It referred to something like ‘sacred male prostitutes’ – men who engaged in orgiastic sex rituals with people of either sex among Israel’s non-Jewish neighbors.
So is Deuteronomy a sort of tabloid press raving about foreigners and their foreign ways?
Leviticus 18.22 has always been the great stumbling block for Christians. Translations such as ‘[y]ou shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination’ sometimes get cited as the principal purpose of the whole of Scripture.
Scott Lively – homophobia’s current patron saint – maintains: ‘From Genesis to Revelations, the Bible teaches that homosexuality is not “just another sin”. It is a symbol of extreme rebellion against God and harbinger of his wrath.’
Strictly speaking, Pastor Lively, the Hebrew reads ‘[y]ou shall not lie with a male on the bedding of a wife; it is a despised thing’. Quite right too, shagging your boyfriend on your wife’s bed would be bad form!
Besides, it’s said that Leviticus defines a series of dos and don’ts for a particular class of Hebrews, the Levites or priestly caste, so it shouldn’t be read as a general formula.
This single verse lies amid a host of dietary prescriptions and other examples of ‘unclean’ or forbidden behaviour, including the eating of shellfish (abomination) and the enslavement of neighbouring people (permissible).
And that’s it for the Old Testament.
The only source of anti-homosexual rhetoric in the New Testament is the writings of Paul, specifically the first letter to the Corinthians and, more extensively, Romans I.
The Gospels are, crucially, silent on the matter.
The Greek text of Corinthians says that ‘the corrupt, and men who lie with men’ will not inherit the Kingdom of God.
But a version in Aramaic, a language commonly spoken among Jews and Gentiles in the Middle East, reads ‘the corrupted, and those who rape men’, a significant reversion. Most likely, Paul was condemning coercive same-sex acts not homosexuality.
Romans is, on first reading, more problematic in that it denounces women who ‘changed their natural use’ and men who are ‘ravished with desire for one another’. But context is everything as the passage relates to the punishment of people who had abandoned the one God in favour of an animal-headed throng.
Let’s face it, Paul was a misery and likely had in his sights devotees of various racy cults, who engaged in that old Biblical bother ‘ritual prostitution’.
As these cults formed a significant threat to Christianity in the early centuries, Paul was warning his flock against them. Even John Chrysostom, whose homophobia borders on hysteria, suggested Paul wasn’t speaking of men who were ‘enamoured of, or lusted after one another’ but those who made a ‘business of it’.
Put simply, modern Christian homophobia is based on manipulations of the original Bible
But what about positive Biblical accounts of same-sex relations, like the love between David and Jonathan? And is Christ entirely silent on the issue?
What about his healing of the Centurion’s beloved servant? Or his opinion in Matthew that men ‘who were born that way’ shouldn’t marry?
Well these too were subject to textual revision in Greek and Latin translations to play down their significance or render them ‘Platonic’.
Ghanaians should beware of preachers who incite hatred by misusing bad translations of the original biblical writings. Jesus loves us all and accepts us no matter who we choose to take as our true love.
dadwene 8 years ago
Soon child molesters will claim the same that there are scientific reasons they do what they do. So how many verses in the Bible do we need in order to say homosexuality is unnatural and against the teachings of the Bible. ... read full comment
Soon child molesters will claim the same that there are scientific reasons they do what they do. So how many verses in the Bible do we need in order to say homosexuality is unnatural and against the teachings of the Bible. I cheated on my wife before and it is wrong, should I continue to do that and claim the Bible is not really clear on that because it only mention it 22 times in the Bible? You don't need a whole New Testament on homosexuality to know it is forbidden
Wiseone 8 years ago
You try so hard to discredit the bible's stand on homosexuality but you failed miserably. You can argue about it but still don't change the fact that homosexuality is condemned in the Bible. Take it or leave it.
You try so hard to discredit the bible's stand on homosexuality but you failed miserably. You can argue about it but still don't change the fact that homosexuality is condemned in the Bible. Take it or leave it.
NICHOLAS 8 years ago
You are a member of the Jury but I prefer to call you Kay.If you think it is through homosexuality that your parents brought you into being then it is over to you.
It is very sickening that this evil practice is being forc ... read full comment
You are a member of the Jury but I prefer to call you Kay.If you think it is through homosexuality that your parents brought you into being then it is over to you.
It is very sickening that this evil practice is being forced on our throat in the name of human right.Why is it that some people want to create disorderliness in our world by supporting and defending such madness?
Let us collectively strive to allow morality to reign over evil in this world.
Queenie 8 years ago
Homo's are scared of the truth and now want to demonized anyone who won't condone their lifestyle. As a result, most are bashing the bible even though, majority claims to be Christians. They want to choose and pick bible vers ... read full comment
Homo's are scared of the truth and now want to demonized anyone who won't condone their lifestyle. As a result, most are bashing the bible even though, majority claims to be Christians. They want to choose and pick bible verses and discard the others that denounced their behaviors.
Kwame 8 years ago
Psychologists and Genetics.
We wrote sometime ago that though sex is a biological need which result lead to reproduction among animals, in society sex loses its purely biological nature because homo sapiens have lost the ins ... read full comment
Psychologists and Genetics.
We wrote sometime ago that though sex is a biological need which result lead to reproduction among animals, in society sex loses its purely biological nature because homo sapiens have lost the instinct to sex. Homo sapiens have even lost the instinct to food and as babies have to be feed and at the same time thought how to feed. You can observe bulls, young goats and sheep imitating sex and having sex with the same sex, which is a fact.
I wrote the other time that when I was a child I sleep with my sisters, older than I. I do not know what is sex so I just enjoy the warmth of my sister or better cousins. I even go to the extend to torch their breasts, just for fun. One night I was stung by an ant and as I scratch the spot the pain became unbearable and I begun to cry. The two girls with whom I sleep in the mosquito net were deep at sleep so do not know that something was happening to me. A cousin in the opposite mosquito net invited me to theirs. I observed that she put her index finger into her vagina then robbed the spot and the pain got less. I was going into sleep when she lifted me, put me on herself, held my penis, pull it that I had erection and put it into her vagina. The pain completely went away and there I lie inside her and sleep.
To illustrate that stories about brothers and sister who got lost and have not had contact with other people do not know sex, thus do not have sex with each other until they see someone having sex or had sex with them. Thu homosexuality is not a biological orientation, but a bad act that has been learn by people who come into contact with wayward elements in society.
Abeeku Mensah 8 years ago
There seems to be an intrinsic stupidity that comes with zealotry, be it in party politics, tribal and or cultural. The question most of us as so-called heterosexuals need to grapple with is this: Is dishonesty a sickness or ... read full comment
There seems to be an intrinsic stupidity that comes with zealotry, be it in party politics, tribal and or cultural. The question most of us as so-called heterosexuals need to grapple with is this: Is dishonesty a sickness or genetic? Should men and women who stay faithful to celibacy until marriage question the majority of us who fornicate prior to marriage and or commit adultry while married or in relations on the seeming normalization of immoral acts? Heterosexuals cannot pick and choose what issues and when to be outraged about even to the extent of selective use of the Christian Bible or Muslim Koran or the Torah to make our case or take a stand. Those good books are replete with things we must ward against and yet we selectively and hypocriticaly ignore while we hop on the one abomination a minority in society do practice. I wished my heterosexual communities everywhere could put an end to the evils we justify; we may just then save the human race even as homosexuals face extinction with ailments that manifest in their lifestyles and practices. It is easy for the majority who do not understand one of the drivers of democratic values to draw up their infantile conclusions about the ruling in the Supreme Court of USA on homosexuality. The pronouncement from the US court does not advocate, encourage and or entice heterosexuals to become homosexuals; it bars discrimination sanctioned by the heterosexual majority and reminds us all why pretentious democracues fail or why Ghana is not a true democracy.
Rachel 8 years ago
Abeeku, voicing an opinion doesn't make someone stupid, otherwise, I would've said the same thing about your post since our opinions are different. It's another thing for the Supreme Court to make anti-discrimination laws for ... read full comment
Abeeku, voicing an opinion doesn't make someone stupid, otherwise, I would've said the same thing about your post since our opinions are different. It's another thing for the Supreme Court to make anti-discrimination laws for the gays but to take a step further by granting them marriage rights has nothing to do with true democracy. What's the definition of a wife and husband? How can two people of the same sex be calling each other, wife & wife or husband & husband? I'm sorry but the world is one sick planet.
Kwame 8 years ago
Abeeku Mensah your logic fall flat on the face. A religion forbid that its members should not eat pork. A member of that religion eats pork which does not break any law or cause harm to another person. He kills a big and ate ... read full comment
Abeeku Mensah your logic fall flat on the face. A religion forbid that its members should not eat pork. A member of that religion eats pork which does not break any law or cause harm to another person. He kills a big and ate the body. He did not kill another person and ate his body. Guns are manufactured to be used to kill, but killing another person with gun even when he told you to kill him is a crime. Taking the life of a person goes against nature and society. If we are to make a spot of each other society will not progress. Making spot of human reproductive organs is just the same like killing the human race.
Stanley, Seshie 8 years ago
I pointed out clearly that most of the nations legalizing homosexuality are doing so due to their discrimination and segregation histories that devilled them. Ghana has no such history.
Democracy does not mean leaving soc ... read full comment
I pointed out clearly that most of the nations legalizing homosexuality are doing so due to their discrimination and segregation histories that devilled them. Ghana has no such history.
Democracy does not mean leaving society with no moral boundaries.
Vuvula 8 years ago
Well said Stanley!
Well said Stanley!
TINA, USA 8 years ago
Thanks for the educative article , for those who rely solely on science to explain every day life. Whatever mankind does, God is the creator of the universe and every living thing in it, so what He says is final, and there ar ... read full comment
Thanks for the educative article , for those who rely solely on science to explain every day life. Whatever mankind does, God is the creator of the universe and every living thing in it, so what He says is final, and there are no mistakes with God. People forget that what science finds out has been there long before their discovery. Do not strive with your maker, for it is terrible thing to fall into the hands of God, the creator of the heavens and the earth.
are those who believe solely in science going to accept this or not, use science to judge now.
francis kwarteng 8 years ago
Tekonline.org,
You should take a look at the following:
1) "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False" (Pubmed, John Ionnidis)
2) "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False: Author's Reply to
Goodman and ... read full comment
Tekonline.org,
You should take a look at the following:
1) "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False" (Pubmed, John Ionnidis)
2) "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False: Author's Reply to
Goodman and Greenland" (PloS Medicine, John Ionnidis)
3) "Scientific Incentives And Practices To Promote Truth Over Publishability (ll) (Perspectives on Psychological Science; Brian Nosek & Co)
4) "Lies, Damned Lies, and Medical Science" (The Atlantic, John Ionnidis)
Prof. Ionnidis is a health reserach professor at Stanford School of Medicine.
5) "Living With P-Values: Resurrrecting a Bayesian Perspective on Frequentist Statistics" (Epidemology, Poole and Greeland)
I can only get these five since you brought up p-value. Thanks for narrowing it down for me. Please be reminded that the issues I have been raising with you abound in scientific and (non-scientific) journals.
This is why I wonder why you have not read tons of such technical papers in some of the journals you and I had discussed. Well, p-value is imperfect and there is international reserach collaborations to improve it.
That said, to minimize its shorcomings/limitations, some researchers use other approaches I briefly outlines in some of my comments on this forum.
Let me leave you to attend to other pressing matters. I will continue to look for more (there are specific ones I want to show you) in the future when I have time on my side.
I think I have also used up all my ten slots and can't respond to you, at least not under this article.
Some of us know that homosexuals has nothing to do with genetic. Those who are trying to link homosexuality to genetic or whatever, are evil and if the US and some other nations have legalized it does not mean we should do th ...
read full comment
IT IS NOT SEXUAL ORIENTATION, IT IS A PSYCHO-SEXUAL DISORDER, JUST LIKE OTHER SEXUAL DISORDERS. THERE IS NO GENETIC PROOF OF GAYNESS. IT IS PURELY HORMONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL. THE GAY LOBBY IS TRYING HARD TO CHANGE WHAT PSYCHO ...
read full comment
Well said Dr Jones
It is now well-established that the sex hormones play a role in gender identity and development (see the abstract at the bottom).
The so-called Neuro-Hormonal Theory posits that even though the X and Y chromosomes determi ...
read full comment
Thanks for providing some helpful scientific insights into the reasons why there is diversity in gender identity and sexual orientation amongst human populations everywhere, including Ghana.
Dear Tekonline.org,
How are you?
I quite remember reading somewhere that some scientists involved involved in monitoring animals for same-sex or homosexual tendencies regulated/manipulated the experimental animals' hor ...
read full comment
Good Day, Francis.
I haven't been paying much attention to the controversies you outlined. The science is complex enough without straying into other areas.
The overwhelming majority of scientists care ONLY about reliable ...
read full comment
I WONDER WHY BEING SEXUALLY ATTRACTED TO A CORPSE OR A DOLL OR AN BABY IS NOT CONSIDERED SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
IS SEXUAL ATTRACTION CALLED SEXUAL ORIENTATION WHEN IT IS HARMLESS? WHEN A MAN IS ATTRACTED TO A BABY, SEXUALLY, ...
read full comment
The phenomenon in question is gender disorder as mediated by SEX HORMONES.
The situations you cited have never been observed in studies involving the sex hormones.
This topic is excellently covered in the ongoing Brain ...
read full comment
GAYS WOULD REALLY BE UPSET THAT U CALL WHAT THEY ARE A DISORDER. GAYS SAY IT IS NOT A DISORDER. ACTUALLY, THEY CLAIM IF BEING GAY IS A DISORDER, THEN IT MEANS BEING HETERO IS THE ORDER OR THE NORM. THEY CLAIM THERE IS NO ORD ...
read full comment
It is not exactly a "disorder" in the true sense of the word. It is only with regard to the Darwinian evolutionary purpose of having XX organisms attracted to XY beings.
Androgen hormones receptors exist in the brain (a f ...
read full comment
Sorry I was in a rush and couldn't proofread as well as conclude.
The concluding point was, in terms of procreation to help the species survive, one could call it a disorder, but for achieving just a romantic union it woul ...
read full comment
Dear Tekonline.org,
Good day.
II checked www.TheGreatCourses.com. Great website.
Thanks.
Dear Teckonline.org,
I just this and decided to respond to it. Thanks for your comments anyway.
I am familiar with PUMMED (PUNMBED CENTRAL) but unfortunately not everything that is published there that is accepted in th ...
read full comment
Hello Francis, well all you have to do, is to pick one study, and debate the DATA. Tell us how the data is problematic. That's how scientists deal with issues.
I think you tend to dwell too much in OPINIONS. In science, y ...
read full comment
Dear Tekonline.org,
My preoccupation is not opinion per se.
It is interpretation of a given set of data. Not all scientists see data in the same way. I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT OPINION.
I wish I could easily locate for ...
read full comment
The Scientific Methodology pays particular attention to standard data interpretation via STATISTICS (a subject I'm sure as a mathematician you know too well). Without that science would have gone nowhere, as the same data see ...
read full comment
Yes,
You can begin by reading Lancet, Science, Nature, Pubmed, etc., and you should find empirical examples of what I am talking about.
Some of the examples I am talking come specifically from Lancet and the New Englan ...
read full comment
"...I am aware of "how much recebnt stuff is out there there." Remember I mentioned some of my former New York-based biology professors to you.
One of them sits on the editorial board of one of these respected journals. He ...
read full comment
Tekonline.org,
Don't worry.
This was the same problem I had last year when I was asked on Ghanaweb to produce evidence supporting my claim that Wole Soyinka did base his play "Kongi's Harvest" on Kwame Nkrumah.
Yes ...
read full comment
It takes just a few seconds to find articles using the search button on Eurekalert.org
Tekonline.org,
I have just sent you one on one of the problems which p-value poses in the biological sciences, particualrly, as far as interpretation of data is concerned (Lancet paper).
Thanks for bringing up p-value a ...
read full comment
Tekonline.org,
In my rush to reply to your email I forgot to mention this fact:
Part of the problem I am talking about is itself caused by statistics, probability, mathematical modeling, time series analysis, etc. in aa ...
read full comment
In most biological studies, the P-value is more than enough to make scientists accept data if the experimental methodology is valid.
Tekonline.org,
And you think p-value has not limitations?
Epidemiologists encounter the limitations of p-value almost everyday!
Again, this should be a topic for another day if we should extend the limitations of p ...
read full comment
The problem with the search for truth lies with right wing evangelicals, Orthodox patriarchs, some African bishops (but not the wonderful Desmond Tutu).
These well meaning but wrong minded people maintain the Bible is intr ...
read full comment
Soon child molesters will claim the same that there are scientific reasons they do what they do. So how many verses in the Bible do we need in order to say homosexuality is unnatural and against the teachings of the Bible. ...
read full comment
You try so hard to discredit the bible's stand on homosexuality but you failed miserably. You can argue about it but still don't change the fact that homosexuality is condemned in the Bible. Take it or leave it.
You are a member of the Jury but I prefer to call you Kay.If you think it is through homosexuality that your parents brought you into being then it is over to you.
It is very sickening that this evil practice is being forc ...
read full comment
Homo's are scared of the truth and now want to demonized anyone who won't condone their lifestyle. As a result, most are bashing the bible even though, majority claims to be Christians. They want to choose and pick bible vers ...
read full comment
Psychologists and Genetics.
We wrote sometime ago that though sex is a biological need which result lead to reproduction among animals, in society sex loses its purely biological nature because homo sapiens have lost the ins ...
read full comment
There seems to be an intrinsic stupidity that comes with zealotry, be it in party politics, tribal and or cultural. The question most of us as so-called heterosexuals need to grapple with is this: Is dishonesty a sickness or ...
read full comment
Abeeku, voicing an opinion doesn't make someone stupid, otherwise, I would've said the same thing about your post since our opinions are different. It's another thing for the Supreme Court to make anti-discrimination laws for ...
read full comment
Abeeku Mensah your logic fall flat on the face. A religion forbid that its members should not eat pork. A member of that religion eats pork which does not break any law or cause harm to another person. He kills a big and ate ...
read full comment
I pointed out clearly that most of the nations legalizing homosexuality are doing so due to their discrimination and segregation histories that devilled them. Ghana has no such history.
Democracy does not mean leaving soc ...
read full comment
Well said Stanley!
Thanks for the educative article , for those who rely solely on science to explain every day life. Whatever mankind does, God is the creator of the universe and every living thing in it, so what He says is final, and there ar ...
read full comment
Tekonline.org,
You should take a look at the following:
1) "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False" (Pubmed, John Ionnidis)
2) "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False: Author's Reply to
Goodman and ...
read full comment