[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 39 KB, 720x539, 1434314960747.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7334893 No.7334893 [Reply] [Original]

If homosexuality is anti-natural...
then how come animals can be gay?

>> No.7334895

>>7334893
Animals can have mental disorders too.

>> No.7334924

>>7334895
So mental disorders are natural.

>> No.7334926

So your argument is that homosexuals are animals?

>> No.7334949

>>7334926
Humans are animals, yes. Welcome to elementary school.

>> No.7334968

>>7334949
This.

/thread

>> No.7335039

>>7334924
Animals can have cancer too. Just because it's natural doesn't make it good.

>> No.7335049

>>7334924
Hemlock is all-natural non-GMO. Go make a smoothie with it you hippie bastard.

>> No.7335050

>>7335039
>>7335049
No one said anything about homosexuality being good, you illiterate /pol/tards.

>> No.7335226

>>7335050
What's bad about homosexuality?

>> No.7335242

>>7334893
What about pedophile animals?

>> No.7335312

>>7334893
>animals can be gay

Can they? Is there really any evidence of this? Some animals in breeding season may try to mate with the closest thing available. Does that make such an animal "gay"?

>> No.7335316

>>7335312

People who make these claims are just SJWs pushing their filthy corruption of sexuality down everyone's throat.

There's no need to argue with them.

>> No.7335328

Why are some people worried about fags dominating the world except for religious reasons anyway? The human race extinction thing is even more retarded than religious because gays can still fuck girls and their kids can still be het.
Being a fag, I'm genuinely curious. I can watch lesbian porn just fine without feeling disgusted (or aroused). Of course you don't have to watch gay porn and no one force you to.

>> No.7335420

>>7334893
Wow so your an animal thanks for clearing that up op
>back to the woods with you.

>> No.7335455

>>7334893
Does anyone on /sci/ actually make the claim that homosexuality isn't natural?

But as others have said, natural doesn't mean good. Go eat some poisonous mushrooms if that's your argument,

>> No.7335536

>>7335226
Overall, it is harmful to our society.

>> No.7335538

>>7334968
>>7334949
Heil Hitler

>> No.7335549

>>7334893
>anti-natural
>natural

pls define this first then I will answer your question

>> No.7335553

>>7334895

OK, I'll bite.

How's being gay a disorder?

What does it hinder me from doing that makes it not worth-while, other than by how others choose to treat me for its own sake?

Why is it better to be straight?

>> No.7335557

>>7334893
>chemists think certain molecules are 'inorganic'
>biologists treat humans as though they aren't animals
>ecologists distinguish between 'natural' and 'man-made' disasters, as if man is not a part of nature
>psychologists distinguish 'mind' from 'body'
>neurobiologists and pharmacologists use bullshit distinctions like 'chemical' and 'psychological' addiction
>scientists treat philosophy like it has no relevance to the scientific method
>gen pop acts like science is the end-all be-all of understanding
>people legitimately believe evolution has anything to do with 'progress' or 'improvement'
>genetic information is commonly viewed as immutable
>and so on and so forth

The real issue here is that people are complete dipshits.

>> No.7335561

>>7334893
Animals aren't gay. they don't have the intellect to even know what that means. Being gay is natural in the sense that it's an error of nature. Kind of like a kid who's born deformed. Or someone who is Bipolar etc. If nature intended for people to be gay, Men would be able to give birth and Females would be capable of making other Females pregnant. It probably comes from the fact that at some point we evolved from something that had the traits of being able to do just that, and for some reason the "gene" just didn't get turned off at birth.

>> No.7335566

>>7335328
But you're worse than Jews and control Hollywood and the media. Also gays can't have children so they have to indoctrinate others to reproduce more gays.

Satisfying answer?

>> No.7335571

>>7335561
>If nature intended
oh anon that's where you go wrong
nature doesn't intend shit
And as "gay" it's meant as follows: animals from the same sex that uphold relations in sexual and somewhat "affective" ways. Ducks are a common example of this, but other animals can be pointed out as animals where two same-sex subjects act around each other like they would act to a different sex, if they were "normal/straight".
But as always, my argument isn't that "it's not unnatural" or anything else, but rather that no one should give a shit about it. I mean... It's not like the whole world will become gay, or that, even then, we'll stop reproducing. There's literally zero downsides to being gay for society as a general, and being gay doesn't hurt anyone in anyway. Why give a shit if somebody is a fag or not

>> No.7335576

>>7335571
Semantics.
Saying nature intended is just a generic way of saying how it's supposed to be. We're clearly made to procreate and pass along our genetic information. That's "nature". I don't have a problem with people being gay. But it's definitely abnormal behavior, in that it doesn't produce or pass on anything as is natural, and I don't think it's wrong to recognize and study it based on that fact.

>> No.7335579

>>7335576
Well, then I concur with you. Being gay is, biologically speaking, abnormal behavior. I just don't like it when people use that or any other kind of argument to put down homosexuality as some kind of sickness or problem that needs to be addressed

>> No.7335580

>>7335566
>Also gays can't have children so they have to indoctrinate others to reproduce more gays.
You really believe that gay can infest other people to be gay?
Nah. As a straight, you must think that fucking a guy is gross, right? Now tell my how can you gay-converting a het?
The same goes for gays. Of course we can fuck girls to give births to children. But an adopted child can't be affected by the sexuality of the parents. The worst they can do is feel disgusted by gay parents and the best is they don't give a shit.

>> No.7335581

>>7335566
What about gay jews?

>> No.7335587

>>7335566
>But you're worse than Jews and control Hollywood and the media.
kek, are you gay now because you watched The imitation game?
Are there any concrete study about how a movie or a song affect a person's sexuality?
If not then you should be on /pol/, child. Not that /sci/ is a good board but you people are like /x/ but replace gay/jews with Illuminati. Stop being a kid and do not blame other people for your own mistakes.

>> No.7335596

>>7334893
Well obv it isn't unnatural. If you absolutely feel the need to hate on gays you should do it out of pure principle.

>> No.7335601

>>7335581
No such thing, like a square number that is also a cube number.

>>7335587
>>7335580
Glad to see you read my comment and it went completely over your heads.

>> No.7335603

>>7335536

not that anon but how is it bad for society

>> No.7335611

>>7335601


gay jews exist lol,that being said, there was one specific one that's better as an adoptive father than most people in the midwest

>> No.7335612

>people who only care about the problems of others when it's something they can be disgusted or offended by
>people who are like this when examining characteristics that aren't even problematic anyway

Comparably speaking, this sounds like way more of a mental disorder than homosexuality. I'll call it "faggotidous". It's the common disorder /pol/ shares with tumblr.

>>7335601
>Gay Jews
>No such thing, like a square number that is also a cube number.

How is it anything like that?

>Hey guys, so I'm a gay Jew
>Well I did the math and that would seem to be impossible; given that a cubic number cannot also be a square number, that's no mathematically possible way for you to be homosexual

These are the symptoms of faggotidous.

>> No.7335619

>>7335612
>given that a cubic number cannot also be a square number,

9 = 3^2 and ~2.08^3

>> No.7335625

>>7335312
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIcrCZQkSlg


http://www.amazon.com/Biological-Exuberance-Homosexuality-Diversity-Stonewall/dp/031225377X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1434559010&sr=8-1&keywords=Biological+Exuberance+by+Bruce+Bagemihl

>> No.7335630

>>7335619
Honestly I'm not totally sure what most people mean by "cube" and "perfect cube" etc. I see the definitions flop from using only roots to using any integer so on and so fourth. I was just paraphrasing the quoted anon. With the roots definition, you can't have something which is broken down into a multiple of three roots which can also be broken down into a multiple of two roots.

>> No.7335640

>>7335630
Remember your number line? Good; count it. It won't take much longer than 1 minute before you see the cube/square that follows on from 1.

>> No.7335644

>>7335612
>like a square number that is also a cube number
What is 1

>> No.7335647

>>7335644
What is ^6. Fucking hell, I'd get a better maths in on /q/.

>> No.7335657

>>7335640
Not if you're breaking things down into roots

When completely factored, each non-root can only be factored down into one set of multiplied roots. 9 is broken down into 3*3, 20 is broken down into 2*2*5, so on and so fourth. You can't completely factor it "differently" and get a different answer. If you break down into two roots, you're definitively the product of two roots, no more no less. If you break down into three roots, you're definitively the product of three roots, no more no less. You can't have both three and two, so you can't be a square and a cube. If you break down into the product of multiple instances of one particular root, you're a square/cube/quadthing etc.

>>7335644
I should have said nonroot, noone factors 1.

>> No.7335660

>>7335657
Then see >>7335647. Given n an integer, the number n^6 is a square and a cube.
So not only are there gay Jews, but there are infinitely many of them.

>> No.7335668

>>7335660
No
A square is something which factors down into a root (an unfactorable number) times that same root. 2^6, 64, isn't a square or a cube. You can break it down into 8*8 or 4*4*4, but 8 and 4 can be broken down further.

>> No.7335669

>>7335601
>No such thing, like a square number that is also a cube number.
You mean like 0, 1, 64, 729, ... n^6

>> No.7335672

>>7335669
>64
literally the previous post

>> No.7335675

>>7335668
Now you're introducing your own arbitrary terminology. No one defines a square or a cube that way.

>> No.7335677

>>7335672
>In mathematics, a square number or perfect square is an integer that is the square of an integer

>> No.7335678

>>7335675

That's how I'd always been taught it, but I went out of my way in >>7335630 to explain that I've seen it used either way and that I just went with the definition that fit what >>7335601 was claiming.

>> No.7335682

>>7335678
I think the issue stems from your flawed definition of the word "root".

>> No.7335708

>>7335682
Yeah I actually have been just saying root when I should say something like complete root

I'd been told multiple times though when learning factoring as a wee lad that you have to break things down entirely for them to be squares cubes etc, but I may have just gone to a retarded school

assuming at least someone here is a math major, what's the significance of square/cubes as terminology? Are there mathematical scenarios where you'd make use of that label?

>> No.7335957

>>7335678
Wait; hold up. You honestly believe that my position (in>>7335601) was that not only does n^6 not exist, but neither do gay Jews or indeed that gays actually have a so called 'agenda' conservative pundits keep referring to?

Fucking hell. Wasn't this the most board voted most likely to engage in critical thinking?

>> No.7335976

Because humans are unnatural, artificial, synthetic, inorganic produce.

>> No.7335994

>>7335603
Have you ever seen a gay pride parade?

>> No.7336012 [DELETED] 

Go back to /hoc/.

>> No.7336015

>>7335994
Don't compare all gay people to the ones you see in pride parades, I'm gay and I hate thse fucking things.

It's no different to comparing black people to retarded niggers, there's a difference dude.

>> No.7336016 [DELETED] 

>>7336015
So you're an engineer, then?

>> No.7336027

>>7335557
>chemists think certain molecules are 'inorganic'

There is nothing wrong with that retard.

>> No.7336047

>>7334893
>If homosexuality is anti-natural...
It doesn't matter. Just because something is unnatural doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.

>> No.7336159

>>7334893
The idea of something being natural is just a social construct. There is nothing wrong or unnatural about people being different, no matter how strange it may seem to society. Let me tell you my story...
I sexually identify as a pseudo-Riemannian Manifold. Ever since I was a boy I dreamed of having my own non-degenerate, smooth, symmetric metric. People say to me that a person being a pseudo-Riemannian Manifold is impossible and I’m fucking retarded but I don’t care, I’m beautiful. I’m having a plastic surgeon install tangent spaces, geodesic lines and vector fields on my body. From now on I want you guys to call me “M” and respect my right to be defined purely from my intrinsic geometry. If you can’t accept me you’re a maniphobe and need to check your geometric privilege. Thank you for being so understanding.

>> No.7336180

>>7336027
Wanna know how I know you're a chemist?

>> No.7336225

>>7336180
No shit Sherlock

>> No.7337530

>>7335994
How are gay pride parades harmful to society?

>> No.7338257

>>7337530
taboos and unspoken rules are a part of society. As an autistic retard i like to break them once in a while, but gay pride parades takes this to a whole new level. The sole porpose of those parades is to provocate by breaking taboos like nudity and public sexual references. You gotta hate attention whores.

>> No.7338520

>>7336159
Best post in this board this year.

>> No.7338549
File: 76 KB, 509x720, 1429977528842.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7338549

>>7334893
Natural doesn't always mean good.
A lot of animals are dumb fucks who would roll in their own shit and fuck the trees when they feel the need. They can't help it, that is how they are.
A good white man recognizes this and while he will not blame inferior animals for being what they are, he will be disgusted and not tolerant of humans who stoop as low as them

>> No.7338721

>>7334924
yes so is death

>> No.7339234

>>7338257
>Confirmed for never actually going to a pride parade

>> No.7339251

Why does /sci/ attract so many /pol/acks?

>> No.7339305

Logical Fallacy: Appeal to Nature

Just because certain animals behave a certain way does not mean that behavior is acceptable for humans or other animals. There are some species in which rape is a primary mechanism of reproduction.

>> No.7339313

>>7339251
Because lately, the radical left has become as anti-science as the religious right.

>> No.7339352

>>7338257
So what you're saying is, they are harmful to society because they are attention whores?

>> No.7339360

>>7339305
All heteronormative sex is rape, so that species would be humans :^)

>> No.7339371

>>7339251

Because /pol/ wants scientific validation for their world view.

>> No.7339397

>>7339313
Other than GMOs, I'm not sure that's true at all. Homosexuality is scientifically supported. As is Global warming. As is evolution.