It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Setting all the paranoias of possibility aside for a moment ... what difference does it make as to what "creates" homosexuality?
www.whale.to...
In preparing America for nuclear attack during the Cold War years following World War II, thousands of US citizens became the innocent victims of over 4,000 secret and classified radiation experiments conducted by the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and other government agencies, such as the Department of Defense, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, the Public Health Service (now the CDC), the National Institutes of Health, the Veterans Administration (VA), the CIA, and NASA.
November 1993 in a series of articles in the Albuquerque Tribune which identified the names of 18 Americans secretly injected with plutonium, a key ingredient of the atomic bomb and one of the most toxic substances known to man. Some, but not all, of the patients were terminally ill. This horrifying story by journalist Eileen Welsome (who later won a Pulitzer Prize) unleashed a storm of nationwide protest prompting Department of Energy Secretary Hazel O’Leary to order the release of secret files and documents pertaining to these Cold War experiments.
Not all atheists subscribe to moral relativity. Some believe in moral quantum theory.
Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by Gryphon66
Not all atheists subscribe to moral relativity. Some believe in moral quantum theory.
I'm not familiar with moral quantum theory at all. Wasn't able to find results with a google search either. Have some links?
(I was, of course, also making a small quip at "moral relativity" as opposed to "moral relativism." Mea Culpa.)
Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by Gryphon66
(I was, of course, also making a small quip at "moral relativity" as opposed to "moral relativism." Mea Culpa.)
Oh sweet Raptor Jesus, how did I miss that? lol
And here I had already spent some mental energy trying to wrap my head around quantum morality.
The Joe Biden revelation IS the 'extraordinary' evidence to back up my 'extraordinary' claim that the mass media played a major role in shaping peoples perceptions regarding homosexuality. It is your opinion that its ''hardly anything at all'' and given your opposition to my stance on this, you are obviously going to be dismiss the evidence. I've noticed in debates that people who demand evidence have a tendency to automatically dismiss any evidence when presented. No amount of evidence would prove anything to them.
@ Lucid Lunacy... I repeat what I said to Skorpion. Extraordinary claims require Extraordinary evidence. What you have presented so far is equivalent to the Joe Biden quote. Hardly anything at all. Evidence points to a steady percentage of the populace being gay, and that the perception of an increase was due to awareness.
Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by frazzle
Just like Skorpion you speak about it as if it were factual and not purely speculative. You do so based on apparently no evidence.
Don't you think you should have some strong supporting evidence before you think it a probable scenario? I repeat what I said to Skorpion. Extraordinary claims require Extraordinary evidence. What you have presented so far is equivalent to the Joe Biden quote. Hardly anything at all. Evidence points to a steady percentage of the populace being gay, and that the perception of an increase was due to awareness.
Questions are the basis of scientific inquiry.
Yes. But to constantly bombard minds with the message ''x should be accepted'' via the mass media is manipulative and done solely to achieve a purpose, i.e- get people to accept x . Choking down opposing views is downright underhanded. How is it that some people object to people giving their OWN kids a religious upbringing, calling it ''indoctrination''...even calling it ''abuse''... YET are completely indifferent to strangers telling young boys to cross-dress? That amounts to indoctrinating young minds into accepting a certain behaviour.
Lucid Lunacy ....
We all influence each other. This is simply how a society functions.
sk0rpi0n
Yes. But to constantly bombard minds with the message ''x should be accepted'' via the mass media is manipulative and done solely to achieve a purpose, i.e- get people to accept x . Choking down opposing views is downright underhanded.
How is it that some people object to people giving their OWN kids a religious upbringing, calling it ''indoctrination''...even calling it ''abuse''... YET are completely indifferent to strangers telling young boys to cross-dress? That amounts to indoctrinating young minds into accepting a certain behaviour.
Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by frazzle
Questions are the basis of scientific inquiry.
I posted about that inquiry when you misused 'theory'. Remember? So I am familiar. Actually if you go back and reference it you'll see the next steps you're supposed to take after the 'question'. Once you've completed the task come back and report the findings.edit on 23-2-2014 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)
Gryphon66
reply to post by frazzle
I know that Lucid is going to point out the obvious to you but here's a coming attraction:
1. Lucid didn't say anything about Joe Biden, that's Skorp that keeps trying to say that one comment by one man proves the existence of a scenario spanning all world-wide media and entertainment, controlling them, and conspiring to promote one message that apparently tears Skorp of the box for some reason, to wit: gay people are people too.
2. What you think of as science is not science, bluntly. This is a synopsis of your argument:
A. There are proven episodes of Government medical experiments carried out on the population in the past.
THEREFORE
B. Any wild, baseless, speculation based on that historical idea is probably true today.
Do you see the problem, now?
#3 The U.S. government has spent $175,587 “to determine if coc aine makes Japanese quail engage in sexually risky behavior”.
#13 The U.S. government once spent 2.6 million dollars to train Chinese prostitutes to drink responsibly.
#25 The National Institutes of Health paid researchers $400,000 to find out why gay men in Argentina engage in risky sexual behavior when they are drunk.
#27 The National Institutes of Health loves to spend our tax money on really bizarre things. The NIH once spent $800,000 in “stimulus funds” to study the impact of a “genital-washing program” on men in South Africa.
sk0rpi0n
Yes. But to constantly bombard minds with the message ''x should be accepted'' via the mass media is manipulative and done solely to achieve a purpose, i.e- get people to accept x . Choking down opposing views is downright underhanded. How is it that some people object to people giving their OWN kids a religious upbringing, calling it ''indoctrination''...even calling it ''abuse''... YET are completely indifferent to strangers telling young boys to cross-dress? That amounts to indoctrinating young minds into accepting a certain behaviour.
Gryphon66
reply to post by frazzle
If you don't want to play in public, don't post in public: use private messages.
Believing that two different members are in some sense "cooperating" AGAINST you seems overly paranoid, don't you think?Perhaps both posters simply have similar exceptions with obvious and irrational fallacies such as are being churned out?
No one here has made the claim that there are no "experiments" being done by government covertly.
The fact that government conducts covert experiments does not prove that any wild, baseless, outlandish theory about a given "experiment" is therefore reasonable, factual or provable.
It's really not that hard to understand.
Posts that offer nothing more than garden-variety anti-government rhetoric: "See OBAMA! CONGRESS!, that PROOOVES it's happening all around us, AAAAHHHH!!!" don't prove anything concrete either.
Do you have anything resembling factual evidence for your theory that sexual preference is being controlled/altered/maintained/engineered by any sort of Government experiment? I ask this particularly in light of the fact that medically, psychologically and academically, there's no strong consensus about what factor or factors even create homosexuality, aside from the general observation that it seems to happen naturally in a certain percentage of the population?
Some evidence, please, not speculation that it "could" be happening, because, ya know, they did it before?