Skip to main content

Famous Frauds in Homosexual Science Part 1: Simon LeVay




I recently wrote a 4 part series on famous frauds inevolution, so I thought a good follow up would be to chronicle a few fraudulent studies that seek to validate homosexuality as being natural.

While scientists have been cheating on their science fair projects to prove Darwinism for more than a century and half, this is a fairly new concept when it comes to homosexuality; therefore, this will only be a two-part series.

In 1991, a neuroscientist (Salk Institute of La Jolla, California) named Simon LeVay conducted an experiment on the brains of 41 deceased people. 19 of these were identified as homosexual men, 16 were heterosexual men, and 6 were heterosexual women. 

The study was to examine a group of neurons in the hypothalamus structure (INAH3), and he found that this region was larger in the heterosexuals he examined. His conclusion, then, was that homosexuality is inborn, meaning people are either born as gay or straight.

This study was published in Science magazine, and became instantly popular. Even today, more than two decades later, it is cited as “the proof” that people are born gay. If people are born gay, they say, then God must have made them that way, and it must not be wrong. 

But one glaring problem in this study is that there is no overwhelming evidence. For example, the conclusion leads the reader to believe that all heterosexuals had larger INAH3 regions than their homosexual counterparts, but that is not true. Three of the heterosexuals had smaller regions than the homosexuals, and likewise three of the homosexuals had larger regions than the heterosexuals. This means that 17% of LeVay’s study contradicts his conclusion, and when one considers that he only looked at 41 brains, 17% is a pretty large number.

Furthermore, as is the case with most neuroscience, one cannot know if brain change is the cause of behavior or is caused by behavior. To look at a cadaver’s brain and conclude that a small region must have made him gay is a jump in science; we don’t know if he was gay because he was born with a small INAH3, or if his INAH3 shrunk because he was gay. (in the same way, we don’t know if depression is caused by chemical change, or if chemical change causes depression)

What we do know is that lifestyle habits affect the neurons in the brain, so it is entirely possible that the majority of his homosexual cadavers’ brains shrunk due to living as gay men, and were not like that from birth.

Also of interest is the fact that scientists do not even agree on how to measure the INAH3. It is a very small region, and there is debate as to whether to measure it by size or by number of neurons. For this reason, many scientists rejected LeVay’s work, and his study has yet to be replicated and bare similar results.

But beyond the science, the most overwhelming piece of evidence against LeVay is the fact that he did not know if the brains belonged to gay or straight people. All he could go by were their case studies, and 19 of them were admittedly gay. If their studies did not mention their being homosexual, then he labeled them as heterosexual, which means he is accepting a lot of guesswork. In fact, 6 of the 16 “heterosexual male” brains came from people who died of AIDS, which, in 1991, shows a greater increase of homosexual activity among them.

For this research to be cited as proof that God creates people as homosexuals from birth is quite a stretch. If you find yourself in a conversation where someone says that God made them (or anyone else) gay, ask them to prove it. If this is the study they refer to, politely show them the poor scientific work that went into producing these results.

Don’t accept fraudulent science; no one has proven that God creates people gay from birth. 

(Read Part 2 here)

Comments

Anonymous said…
you are a fraud. I've studied the literature and you are a liar for jesus. and probably bisexual.
If you have studied the literature I'm sure you wouldn't mind stating what lies I have told and what makes me bisexual.

Popular posts from this blog

To Save a Life

(Like my blog about the peace symbol, this blog was written as a default response to all the parents, students, and other people who are asking my opinion of To Save a Life.) By now you have probably heard of the movie To Save a Life, which opened nation-wide in theaters on January 22nd. The movie deals with so many issues that teens face today, like suicide, cutting, drinking, drugs, premarital sex, teen pregnancy, and abortion. At first glance this movie looks like an awesome resource that we should recommend for our teens, parents, youth pastors, and youth workers. But a closer look at the movie reveals a few disturbing things. For starters, according to pluggedin.com, there are 2 uses of the “A” word, 5 uses of hell (used as a curse word), and once the “D” word is used. There are other crude terms used to describe a girl, and crude terms for referring to sexual activity. There is also a bedroom scene that shows a girl removing a boy’s shirt, then afterwards the girl putting he

Evangelism

“Preach the gospel at all times, and when necessary, use words.” St. Francis of Assisi is given credit for this famous quote (although that exact phrasing does not appear in any of his writings), and a lot of people would think that this is a great philosophy. His actual quote was that everyone should “preach by their deeds.” Preaching with our deeds is not just a strategy, it is a necessity. We are commanded all through the Scriptures to let our light shine and be a peculiar people. People should be able to look at our lives and see that we are Christians. They should see the love of Christ readily on display, and thus feel compelled to live their lives in the same way. The sermon that we should preach with our lives is a sermon of love, joy, peace, patience, self-control, forgiveness, conviction, etc. But this idea that has emerged that says we should ONLY preach with our deeds is a heresy straight from the devil himself. Think about it: who is the one that does not want you t

What is a Curse Word?

I know. Stupid question, right? But lately I have heard Christians begin to debate what actually makes a word a curse word. Since the Bible never says, “Thou shalt not say the ‘s’ word,” how do we know that a word is bad? Because of this I have heard Christians justify cursing. The Bible gives a broad command for Christians to adhere to: let no corrupt word come out of your mouth (Ephesians 4:29). The word corrupt means rotten; therefore, we should never say a rotten word, whether it is on the list of curse words or not. First, we have to realize that there are curse words. On the night of Jesus’ arrest Peter was found guilty of using one himself. Matthew 26:74 tells us that when Peter denied knowing Jesus that he began “to curse and to swear.” This verse shows that there are curse words, and that they are wrong to use. I’m sure whatever words Peter said were not the same curse words that we have in our culture today. Here is the point: a curse word (or rotten word) is any wo