Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

The Football Freak

Members
  • Content Count

    3,042
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,175 Excellent

About The Football Freak

  • Rank
    Footballguy
  • Birthday 01/01/1908

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Bloom County

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    Jacksonville Jaguars

Recent Profile Visitors

3,513 profile views
  1. 100%. How in the world are people still supporting insurrection? It blows my mind, too.
  2. Far too many people can’t look past their political beliefs to gain true, honest perspective. It’s refreshing to read comments like yours. Thank you.
  3. That this is used unironically in a democratic nation is pretty remarkable.
  4. Great question. Whedon basically discarded everything that would make this movie good, or at least less confusing. I’d start firing execs that gave a green light to the changes, too, because they clearly are not understanding or seeing the source material properly. I would change up the entire team that was put on DC.
  5. It was a completely different movie. Really disliked the first one, really liked this one. There was actual backstory, and stuff was making sense. Sense!!! The scene when Diana was explaining the mother boxes and they actually cut back and forth, or Cyborg’s explanation scenes, both tied those stories into the main arc visually. For real storytelling. I think they finally watched a Marvel movie and took notes. Huzzah!
  6. They didn’t even interview everyone at the party. At least one of them has said they were never contacted by the FBI. I’m sure that will come out in this investigation, and I’m really curious to find out why they weren’t contacted. Did the FBI interview anyone directly involved?
  7. There are Master Baiters afoot!!!!! Stay cold, my friends!
  8. It seems the number is about right. I found this: ”This study pulled the information for 477,500 people across the UK Biobank and 23andMe who had taken a survey about various life behaviors, including whether they had engaged in a sexual experience with a person of the same sex at any point in their life. About 26,800 individuals — or 5 percent of the subjects — fit this description, which is similar to the percentage reported across society more generally. All of the subjects consented to this research, including those pulled from 23andMe's archives.” NPR link to (solid, imo) study
  9. Sorry, I don’t feel you were dunking. I’d noticed it ramping up, so mentioned it, but maybe I’m not being fair. Your point is fair. Name calling doesn’t help.
  10. They found it to be 8-25%, from what they’d uncovered, and suspect more is still undiscovered, as well as mentioning other pathways to homosexuality based on genetics that aren’t yet understood. The quotes I lifted from Nature, and the larger article itself, give a bit more detail on the 2019 study. And the points by the posters I mentioned, and those on a similar tangent, further expose the subtleties of the discussion. This could be a pretty interesting discussion, if the “dunking” stops.
  11. The point being made is much more subtle than that. I would sign on with what IK, Maurile, FGIALC and others are saying.
  12. To add a bit more perspective, I found this from Nature: ”Ganna and his colleagues also used the analysis to estimate that up to 25% of sexual behaviour can be explained by genetics, with the rest influenced by environmental and cultural factors — a figure similar to the findings of smaller studies. “This is a solid study,” says Melinda Mills, a sociologist at the University of Oxford, UK, who studies the genetic basis of reproductive behaviours. But she cautions that the results may not be representative of the overall population — a limitation that the study authors acknowledg
  13. Oh, good, they have their golden calf.
×
×
  • Create New...