CuriousChris

Very interesting indeed.

'Designed'? I assume you really mean evolved?

Well it's very interesting that the research I highlighted has caused some food for thought. Would I be right in thinking that the research is generally percieved as worthless?

Why is the word 'faulty' a problem? The epi-markers are normally swept away are they not? And homosexuality occures when they are not correctly swept away? I don't think that the article does say the influence is "faulty" in its normal workings. What obvious circumstantial evidence? I've read your post a few times and I'm not 100% sure I'm getting your point.

I've only made 4 posts still trying to find the ropes This appears to be the originating work. Homosexuality as a Consequence of Epigenetically Canalized Sexual Development

Thanks for your response but that's not the point I was getting at. My comment was intended to illicite a response from King. Correct. But my question was aimed at King as his posts appear to indicate that he thinks individuals evolve, not polpulations. I wanted to clarify this before continuing. Thanks for the reply.

Epigenetics May Be a Critical Factor Contributing to Homosexuality, Study SuggestsThe artical linked to above makes very interesting reading. The existance of homosexual behaviour is counter-intuitive. It should die out as a trait because it is unlikly to foster successful reproduction; a perfect selection pressure for natural selection to work on. The article posites that homosexual behaviour is caused by a faulty transmission of epigenetic markers from a father to daughter or mother to son. Here is the key paragraph from the article. The study solves the evolutionary riddle of homosexuality, finding that "sexually antagonistic" epi-marks, which normally protect parents from natural variation in sex hormone levels during fetal development, sometimes carryover across generations and cause homosexuality in opposite-sex offspring. The mathematical modeling demonstrates that genes coding for these epi-marks can easily spread in the population because they always increase the fitness of the parent but only rarely escape erasure and reduce fitness in offspring. Interesting?

Just a thought. But what entity actually evolves? An individual or a gene pool?

Hello all. I'm Chris. Born in England in 1959 I have been facinated by science from an early age in particular Biology. I grew up in Farnborough in Kent which is a few miles from Downe where Charles Darwin lived while writing OoS. I admin another forum, but it's a pain, so I've joined here to relax. So that's the basics. Regards Chris