Originally posted by BRussell
shetline when are you going to understand that empirical facts are just another form of liberal values? Unless it comes from God or Bush it's inherently untrustworthy.
Regardless of your demogoguery BRussell this empircal fact remains true from the article.
"But the question of mechanism remains."
You have an outcome. You have no cause. ANYTHING that attempts to assign cause to the outcome is indeed speculation. Articles about this particular study specifically note that it made no attempt to determine cause and the author himself notes that he only attempts to isolate for environment.
However anyone who wants to be honest about good science has to admit that exclusion of one factor does not automatically merit inclusion of another factor. It isn't just bad logic, but profoundly bad science as well. This is especially so with statistical evidence as weak as he is presenting.
Lastly even when being willing to give him full credit for his work, there is still the presumption that his analysis properly isolated for environmental factors. It is still entirely possible to have had an environmental factor seperate from socialization related to birth order that could account for this outcome as well. If he didn't isolate for that, it would affect the results.
But, he added, this needs to be looked at in context of the overall rate of homosexuality in men, which he suggested is about 3 percent. With several older brothers the rate may increase from 3 percent to 5 percent, he said, but that still means 95 percent of men with several older brothers are heterosexual.
We are talking about an increase of 2% with 95% of the incidences occuring normally (no causality). It is also not known how large the sample size was of brothers with several siblings. While he did interview and question 944 people it did not start off with all 944 people having several siblings. They were asked about the number of siblings, whether they lived with them or not, etc. Within the 944 there was a sub-sample of men who had several siblings. Until we know that number this 2% might be nothing more than statistical margin of error.