Research attempting to show a biological or genetic cause-and-effect for homosexuality dates back almost a century. But over the years, no research has ever proven a physical basis for homosexuality. Clearly, some scientific researchers believe that homosexuality is constitutional. One often finds their reports happily supplied in homosexual literature. But occasionally, even homosexuals have reason to wonder about this conclusion. For example, in his The Homosexualization of America, homosexual activist Dennis Altman observes of a major Kinsey Institute study: "They are impressed with the considerable efforts of biologists, endocrinologists, and physiologists to prove this foundation; I am more impressed by the inability of many years of research to amount to no more than "suggestions."
If our reading experience is any indication, it seems that most of the popular articles written concerning recent studies concluded that researchers had found firm scientific evidence that homosexuality was to some degree biological in nature. But this just isn't true. Consider the following major studies and research facts.

    When Dr. LeVay was at the Salk Institute, he studied a certain group of neurons in the hypothalamus structure of the brain (called INAH3 or interstitial nuclei of the anterior hypothalamus). He examined 41 cadavers, 19 of which were allegedly homosexual men, 16 of which were assumed to be homosexual men, and 6 which were assumed to be heterosexual women.
    Dr. LeVay found that some of the neurons in the hypothalamus region of the brain of heterosexual men were larger than those he found in homosexual men. He theorized that if homosexual men had smaller neurons, then possibly these smaller neurons were responsible for causing these men to be homosexual. Likewise, if heterosexual men had larger neurons, then possibly these larger neurons caused them to be heterosexual.
    LeVay assumed that if the size difference in neurons could be shown to be true 100 percent of the time, this would be evidence that homosexuality was biologically based.

    However, at least seven scientific reasons were put forth by critics who rejected his theory, reasons which most people have not heard.
    1) Dr. LeVay's own chart, published in Science magazine, revealed there were flaws in his hypothesis. It even contradicted his theory. John Ankerberg had the privilege of interviewing Dr. LeVay at the Salk Institute in La Jolla, California, so we have his recorded comments on tape concerning this. Dr Ankerberg said, "Look, you have three of the nuclei of the homosexual men which are actually larger than those of the heterosexual men. If your theory is valid, this should not be. Second, you have three of the heterosexual men with smaller nuclei than those of the homosexual men." Ankerberg then asked, "Is that true?" And LeVay said, "Yes, that's true." So Dr. Ankerberg asked, "How could it be then, that the Associated Press reported that you 'had always found that the nuclei were larger in the heterosexual men and smaller in homosexual men?" Dr. LeVay admitted this was false. The popular press had distorted his findings.
    2) No scientist has ever proven that the particular region of the hypothalamus under discussion causes sexual orientation. Consider the comments Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, who specializes in working with male homosexuals. His books Healing Homosexuality: Case Stories of Reparative Therapy and Reparative Therapy of Male Homosexuality gained him worldwide respect as an authority in same-sex attractions.
    Dr. Nicolosi emphasizes, "We're talking about a general area of the brain that has to do with emotions, including sexuality; but in this particular nuclei, we have no clear understanding of what function it serves at this point.
    So it would seem that 1) whether the neurons are large or small is not a firm indicator, and 2) no one really knows if they are even related to sexual orientation.
Dr. Charles Socarides, former professor of psychiatry at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York, also noted that "the question of a minute section of the brain-sub-microscopic almost-as...deciding sexual object choice is really preposterous...Certainly...a cluster of the brain cannot determine sexual objects choice. We know that for a fact." 3) Even if the anterior hypothalamus area of the brain could be shown to relate to sexual behavior, it still would not answer the question of cause and effect.
    In other words, what if homosexual behavior itself causes minute organic alterations in the body, which are only a posteriori assumed to be a contributing cause to homosexuality? Scientific studies have indicated that behavior itself might cause the size of the neurons to fluctuate, rather than the neurons causing specific homosexual or heterosexual behavior.
    Dr. Kenneth Klivington, former assistant to the president of the Salk Institute where Dr. LeVay did his study, pointed to "a body of evidence that shows the brain's neural networks reconfigure themselves in response to certain experiences."
    So the relationship between cause and effect-what affects what-is not clear. Therefore, the difference in homosexual brain structure-assuming further studies confirm LeVay's "finding"-may be a result of certain behavior and/or environmental conditions.
    4) The sexual orientation of the people that Dr. LeVay studied could not be verified. When Dr. Ankerberg and Dr. LeVay discussed the fact that three heterosexual men had smaller nuclei than the homosexual men, LeVay said, "Well, maybe some of those individuals were bisexual." Ankerberg responded, "But if it's 'maybe,' then you don't really know," and indeed, Dr LeVay confessed he really didn't know. Some may even have been homosexuals "in the closet" who passed themselves off as heterosexuals. Because all the individuals studied were dead, we simply don't know.
    5) The next problem with LeVay's study involves the possibility of researcher bias. Dr. LeVay is openly gay and has publicly acknowledge this. He is also on record as stating that he set out to prove a genetic cause for homosexuality after his homosexual lover had died of AIDS. He was even quoted in an issue of Newsweek as asserting that if he did not find the genetic cause for homosexuality he sought, he would abandon science altogether. Newsweek further quoted him as saying he is seeking to"...{promote} the idea that homosexuality is a matter of destiny, not choice" because "it's important to educate society" along the lines of biological influence. In fact, LeVay opened his own school for homosexuals and lesbians in Los Angeles to help get the message out. (Due to declining enrollment, LeVay's Institute of Gay and Lesbian Education was closed in 1996). In all fairness, isn't it at least possible that a scientist with such a personal agenda might subject himself to researcher bias?
    6) The interpretation of the data and methodology used LeVay are also questionable. Other scientists have pointed out that the measurement Dr. LeVay used is suspect. Should the alleged influence of the nuclei be evaluated only by size-or, instead, by volume, actual cell count, density, or some other (or all three) criteria? Further, what do scientists do with each of these criteria? What does the data mean? The truth is that no one knows.
    7) LeVay's study faces the problem of almost all research attempting to prove biological determinism: lack of replication. This seems to be the Achilles' heel of all such endeavors, for it appears that almost invariably other scientists discover they are unable to replicate the findings of the initial study, which means that the initial study has proven nothing at all. No matter how widely the results are heralded as "scientific evidence," the "evidence" is either found to be elusive or, if replicated, subject to other interpretations that undercut a biological theory.
Concerning Dr. LeVay's work, there is no replication of his finding in any other scientific study. In fact, at least one study by Dr. Schwab in the Netherlands flatly contradicts it.
    Even though LeVay clarified his research findings in 2001-it's important to stress what I didn't find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn't show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain-he still firmly believes that genetics play a major role in sexual orientation. The important thing to remember regarding LeVay's original research is that 1) it was one of the first studies to imply sexual orientation could be genetically based; 2) it was and still is heralded by some gay activists as "scientific evidence"; and 3) some research studies today still continue to look for a genetic basis for something that is not innate, but learned. Even if there is a genetic factor regarding a predisposition, homosexuality itself is not genetically determined, as we've shown in this book.

    The second scientific study the media have used to propagate the idea that homosexuality is genetically determined is the finding of a prevalence of homosexuality among twin and adopted brothers by homosexual psychiatrist Richard Pillard and psychologist/gay rights activist Michael Bailey. These researchers recruited the subjects for their study through homosexual publications that cater exclusively to the homosexual population. Thus, their study did not represent a randomized, nonbiased selection.
    Nevertheless, they found that of the brothers who responded, 52 percent of identical twins, 22 percent of fraternal twins, 11 percent of adoptive brothers, and 9 percent of non twin brothers were homosexual. Bailey and Pillard theorized that the reason there was such a high percentage of homosexuality among identical twins was because of their identical genetic makeup. But here we also encounter problems. Half of the identical twins were not homosexual; they were clearly heterosexual. How could this be, if they shared the same genes that supposedly predetermined homosexuality? In Perpetuating Homosexual Myths, Richard A. Cohen noted, "If a homosexual orientation is genetic, then 100 percent of all identical twin brothers should have been homosexual, but only half were. Therefore, it is easy to conclude that environmental factors, not genes, cause homosexuality."
    Even Dr. Simon LeVay admitted that neither Bailey and Pillard's study on twins nor his own brain research has proven that homosexuality is genetically determined. "At the moment it's still a very big mystery. Not even my work nor any other work that's been done so far really totally clarifies the situation of what makes people gay or straight...In fact, the twin studies, for example, suggest that it's not totally inborn because even identical twins are not always of the same sexual orientation.
    And, again, we must consider the possibility of research bias. Dr. Pillard admits that his agenda is to promote the notion that homosexuality is inborn and therefore a natural sexual behavior.
    The editorial conclusion of the prestigious British Medical Journal for August 7, 1993, still holds true. It appropriately summarized the problems with all studies like those of Bailey and Pillard,
 

    Twin studies of male homosexuality abound...Most of these results are un-interpretable because of small samples or unresolved questions about phenotypic classification, the selection of cases, and the diagnosis of twin zygosity...Definitive twin and adoption studies of male homosexuality have yet to be done.

    Dr. Dean Hamer and his researches at the National Cancer Institute claim to have found that "male sexual orientation is genetically influenced." Initially they discovered elevated rates of maternally, but not paternally related homosexuality in the families of 76 gays. This suggested potential material transmission of homosexuality through the X chromosome. Thus, the team examined 22 regions or "loci" covering the X chromosome of 40 pairs of homosexual brothers who had volunteered to be studied through advertisements in homosexual publications.
    The researchers found that 33 of the 40 pairs of brothers shared identical genetic markers in five loci of the q28 region of the X chromosome. This led them to the conclusion that a gene or genes in this region influences the expressions of homosexuality in at least 64 percent of the brothers tested.
    But the conclusions are just as suspect as in the earlier research. For example, a "substantial statistical nudging was required to get a 'fit.' "
Further, scientific authorities in the area are not convinced any connection has been established. For example, Ruth Hubbard, a professor emeritus of biology at Harvest University and coauthor of Exploding the Gene Myth, commented:
 

    This study, like similar previous findings, is flawed. It is based on simplistic assumptions about sexuality and is hampered by the near impossibility of establishing links between genes and behavior...Of the relatively small number of siblings in the survey, almost a quarter did not have {the appropriate} markers. Also, the researchers did not do the obvious control experiment or checking for the presence of these markers among heterosexual brothers of the gay men they studied.
 

    In addition, an editorial in the prestigious British Medical Journal commented on the Hamer research as follows: "The linkage results are ambiguous...In their original analysis Hamer, et al., placed the homosexuality gene eight centimorgrans distal to the most telomeric marker. The short physical distance between this marker and the telomere, however, renders this result questionable."
    The editorial concluded: "The claim of linkage of male homosexuality to chromosome Xq28 has wide social and political implications. Yet the scientific question is a complex one, and the interpretation of the results is hampered by methodolgical uncertainties. Further study is crucial to confirm or refute this finding."
    Finally, Dr. Paul Cameron and colleagues, after careful examination of this study and consultation with various experts, also rejected Hamer's conclusions. They pointed out:
 

Taken from The Facts On Homosexuality, by John Ankerberg and John Weldon, Published by Harvest House Publishers

Are You Rapture Ready?