fafalone

The problem with that theory is this paradox: if time slowed down enough, you could see the end of the universe; but you cannot end if you're not participating in the flow of time; so what would you see after the universe ended? furthermore how could a black hole end if time was stopped, since it is in fact composed of matter.

Only way USF is winning is if our entire first and second string are killed.

yeah. after seeing a log of the chat, I decided to write my own news article about it. With 1000 milliseconds left in the 4th quarter, an FSU kicker with a shoe with an arc length angle on the order of 90 degrees struck the surface of a projectile with a x,y and y,z curvature angle on the order of 90 degrees to create a vector with a bearing with a negative x deviatation, which failed to remain within the deviation limits of the target, causing an uproar on the order of 150 decibels and an extreme increase in entropy in the student section of the national champion miami hurricanes. However, this model is not accurate to predict the outcome versus USF, where :delta:scores will be a trinary digit numeral.

If you stayed extremely close to the even horizon of a black hole you'd age slower also.

It's not the first exam you've taken, and probably not the first kind it that format. Expectations also play a role.

Good luck docking while travelling 90% of c.

Either that or a glitch in the matrix...

Similarity to a past experience not remembered consciously. Also short and to the point

In order to age 28 years in 400,000 years local time, you'd have to go 99.999999755% of the speed of light. I suspect by the time we have a form of propulsion (anything we've got now, even antimatter, won't cut it), we wouldn't need to travel in a straight line. t=t0/sqrt(1-v2/c2)

i don't believe no one has figured it out yet

I'd say the parts vary, but i'd set an upper limit on genetic influence at 15% for infuence and 50% for resistance (genetic disposition to NOT being gay despite any social circumstances). Hormonal influences are huge (notice how most (certainly not all) gays are effeminate? but remember not all effeminate guys are gay...)

On ER tonight, all the doctors and nurses walked out because of horrible working conditions, leaving the patients without care. This has happened a few times in real life. Where do all the health related members (and everyone else too) weigh in on this?

Speaking of anniversairies, I just looked at the site calendar... happy birthday sayonara.

That's what I've been trying to say, only without the "could" since it can happen in non-social animals.

If it was purely genetic, it would always happen a certain percentage of the time, or not at all. But because it only happens under extreme social conditions (instead of not at all), is a blatant indication there is no "straight" gene.

Now you're just being a jackass. I NEVER SAID IT WAS ENTIRELY GENETICALLY CONTROLLED. BUT THE FACT CERTAIN SITUATIONS CAN BRING IT OUT IN NON-SOCIAL ORGANISMS PROVES IT IS NOT ENTIRELY SOCIAL. THIS PROVES MY ORIGINAL POINT THAT THERE IS A GENETIC POSSIBILITY OF IT, BUT IT TAKES OTHER FACTORS.

Prison brings up an interesting point in biology. High densities promote homosexual behavoir. Homosexuality rates are higher in the cities. Furthermore, this occurs in non-human species as well. If you put 2 male rats in the same average sized cage, they'll never turn gay. But if you put 20 rats in the same cage, you'll see homosexuality. That's essentially the only way homosexuality happens in the animal kingdom, but this experiment further backs my point of there being a genetic component.

They won't follow you if it entails actually working for something, so that's a major road block.

blike is mexican. that explains it.

blike, no. you made the case for single-gene homosexuality without any other factors. it's a small component of many, and by itself is not that much of a determining factor where it would be eliminated from the gene pool at anything resembling a fast pace.

If it was purely culture you couldn't account for there being only about 10% homosexuality in any given culture.

Well seeing as how you haven't even commented on my hormonal explanation which was the primary point I made... avoiding the central argument for a length of time is grounds for me to declare victory. Obviously some one has never been on a debate team :/

offtopic, but it really bothers me that we could have 50 posts yesterday (most since august 10th) and virtually none today

well its the same thing with homosexuality. society contributes, but you can't ignore biology. i win, thank you and good night

It's always a combination of both. Can't be completely natural born because of evolution, can't be completely cultural because of the same reasons (basic instinct would always override culture, especially in ancient history, even in societies such as ancient greece where homosexuality, especially older men with young boys, was quite common, but their societal population overall wasn't effected)