Necessary for homosexuals. Do you have any idea how many fagots are willing to pay for a remedy to their faggotry? Countless.
Sounds like its necessary for someone's pocketbook :)
What is it that you think it's needed to start off a research like that, besides the money?
We need a neural map accurate enough to identify and reproduce patterns associated with sexuality, we need to be able to track its history through developmental years, then we can comparatively analyze millions of brains to identify the error.
Finally to correct it we need to be able to (certainly) cut specific neuron bridges and (highly likely) connect others.
The solution is also the solution to mind control of most kinds, and there is every reason to be terrified of it in the wrong hands. People can't even trust a little mRNA right now.
It's also way beyond us and if I had to pick a technology which would make this possible it would be nano robotics in most brains from a young age.
I think it's possible.
It must be possible. The energy requirements must be low. No laws of physics need to be broken. The systems may be enormously complicated but certainly within the capacity of realistic computers to model.
It's just engineering and patient analysis, which could still take a long time.
I have the feeling that it's something hormonal, related to the food, the water or some other thing that makes the body be unbalanced.
You might hope there is a single hormone or pheromone that would do the job, but there is no way to know if that is the case and it's unlikely given how impossible it has been to strongly correlate factors to find the 'cause' of homosexuality (or any deviancy).
For example if everybody got perverted after 1920 you could hope that maybe some fertilizer or pesticide is responsible... but we know that's not the case. Homosexuality (and other deviancy) is found in every human race, in every culture, in every time.
Prevalence seems to go up and down, but that can be explained by culture far better than a magic chemical that goes up and down.
It's ubiquitous, which is not to say it's not an error; but it's not a simple error. Like cancer.
How many things cause cancer or might be associated with cancer? A lot, a common error mode in response to many causes through many pathways. You might say a common vulnerability or proneness towards a certain kind of error.
For example in the US the incidence of autism is increasing dangerously, that's defenitely something related to what Americans consume.
See, that's an example with the evidence supports the novel contaminant hypothesis much better.
