There exists an old phrase in Earth’s scientific community: “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” When it comes to alien visits to Earth, we only have one of these.

* * *

The Disclosure Project

In April 1997, 15 witnesses testified in Washington, D.C. of extraterrestrial visits to Earth. Your mind’s eye may construct an unshaven, flannel-garbed man preaching of his abduction or presenting his home-video footage of alien craft.

Nothing so dismissible. The witnesses, speaking at a Center for the Study of Extraterrestrial Intelligence event, included

representatives of more than two dozen US Congressional offices, VIPs from the Executive branch of government and the Pentagon, representatives of the Dutch Embassy, the National Academy of Sciences, and two state Governors’ offices…

All the US government witnesses who were present signed a statement declaring willingness to testify under oath before an open hearing in the US Congress concerning UFO/ET cases and events they personally witnessed.

Dr. Steven Greer, a former physician and founder of CSETI, pointed out, “We had witnesses with top-secret clearances and very sensitive positions, from the Air Force, Navy and Army” who participated in “daylight chases of UFOs” and “attempts to shoot down the objects.” He added he had nearly 100 additional government witnesses.

Greer believes that such witnesses are cracks in a military and government cover-up of alien visits. He offers his evidence, such as eyewitness testimony, video and photographs, and government documents at The Disclosure Project website. He also produced the 2013 documentary “Sirius.” Citizen Hearings on Disclosure now occur annually, presenting testimony old and new.

In May 2001, Greer organized a press conference at the National Press Club, also in D.C. By then, he had 400 government witnesses, with 120 hours of recorded testimony, including that of “Brigadier General Stephen Lovekin of the Army National Guard Reserves and astronaut Gordon Cooper.” 20 witnesses were featured at the event, former military and government personnel.

Witnesses spoke of seeing alien craft, watching NASA technicians airbrush UFOs out of photographs, and helping translate alien languages found on the side of UFO debris.

Greer’s critics point out he has a history of exaggeration, and wonder, since he claims to actually be able to summon aliens to Earth, why he doesn’t do so in a public manner, to put the question to rest for good. It goes without saying any justification he might offer, i.e. preventing mass panic or that aliens will only appear to certain people, is highly convenient. It would also be strange coming from someone desperate to show the world the truth.

For now, less dramatic but nevertheless fascinating events are upheld to support the theory that aliens have visited Earth.

For example, a bizarre 6-inch skeleton (“Ata”) discovered in Chile in 2003, which had 10 ribs (rather than the standard human 12) and a warped skull, was touted by Greer in “Sirius” to be an alien.

However, after Stanford researchers tested its genome, it was determined to be completely human, and only a few decades old. Ata’s B2 haplotype indicates its mother was, predictably, Chilean. It was either a deformed fetus with progeria (rapid aging) that died in the womb or after a premature birth or a child with a severe form of dwarfism. Conspiracy theorists may cry government tampering and cover-up, but the testing was conducted with the approval of the “Sirius” filmmakers. One of the researchers is even featured in the film, before DNA testing was completed.

The Disclosure Project has yet to update its report on the skeleton, which still says “DNA testing continues and is not complete” (its report is dated late April 2013, before the DNA results were announced that May).

Roswell, the Majestic 12, and Pop Culture Coincidences

In the 1980s, conspiracy theorists presented documents they claimed to be classified, leaked from government circles. They were called the “Majestic 12” papers, concerning a secret group of politicians, military leaders, and scientists commissioned by President Harry Truman to recover downed alien spacecraft.

This was allegedly in 1947, the year a rancher living outside Roswell, New Mexico found debris of what local press speculated was a UFO; the Roswell Army Air Field said in a press release that a “flying disk” had been found; a government press conference later that day said it was a weather balloon. (The military later said it was a device used to detect sound waves in the upper atmosphere from Soviet nuclear tests, a top-secret project the RAAF didn’t know about.) The press issued a correction, the rancher said he was sorry for causing confusion.

The story recirculated in the 1980s, which brought it into popularity, but suspicion persisted in New Mexico all the while, fueled by dummy drops and experiments with new technologies and war machines. 

In the 1980s, witnesses spoke of seeing UFOs the day of the Roswell crash, spoke of stumbling upon doctors at Roswell Army Air Field studying alien bodies, and even (in 1995) presented footage of an alien autopsy. The person who presented it later admitted it was a fraud.

Interestingly, the National Enquirer, which re-published the Roswell story claiming a UFO had been spotted (without the later correction), did so a year after the release of the film “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” (1977).

After the movie came out in the UK, the Ministry of Defence received a record number of reports concerning UFO sightings (750 in 1978). Further,

In the year that “Independence Day” and “Mars Attacks” were released there were 609 UFO sightings across the UK, significantly more than the years just before or after.

The year before had 117; this was nearly a 600% increase. The Guardian published in 2009 the number of UFO sightings reported to the Ministry from 1959-2008. It suggests that science fiction television programs and films cause a spike in UFO sightings in either the year of their release and/or the year after. 1967, the year after “Star Trek” debuted, saw a nearly fourfold increase in sightings.

Still, UFO sightings are on the decline. As one senior astronomer at SETI, the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (which has yet to find evidence of alien life), the vast majority of recent UFO sightings occurred in the first half of the last 80 years, despite the fact that billions of humans now have phones with cameras exponentially more advanced than cameras of the past. He suggests advancing technology helps people see more clearly what they are observing, preventing confusion.

Steven Spielberg, the director of “E.T.” and “Close Encounters of the Third Kind,” said:

There are millions of video cameras out there and they’re picking up less videos of UFOs, alleged UFOs, than we picked up in the 1970s and 1980s. There’s 150 per cent more cameras, so why are we getting less from up there?

Perhaps it is also more difficult to create a convincing fake without expensive software. Perhaps the aliens have withdrawn, knowing humans can finally snap a decent photo of their ships. Either way, Adobe’s sales of Photoshop seem secure.

When the Majestic 12 papers surfaced in 1980s, the FBI, predictably, declared them bogus (you can view them here). Critics ridiculed them because

the date format did not conform to governmental style, the papers carried no top secret registration number, military titles were improperly noted, and signatures appeared grafted onto the document. Anachronistic usages like “media” and “impacted” further betrayed the find.   

In other words, a document supposedly from the late 1940s had terms not used until later. Additionally, the 12 supposed members of the secret organization, mentioned in the papers, were dead by 1984, the year the papers surfaced. While conspiracy theorists may call this coincidence (or perhaps a purposeful tactic, see below), others may call it convenient.

Interestingly, Richard Doty, ex-special agent from the U.S. Air Force Office of Special Investigations, claims the Majestic papers were disinformation he spread to UFO researchers to make them think objects in the atmosphere they saw were alien craft, rather than the top secret Air Force projects they were. According to one journalist, the available declassified documents do not point to the Air Force ordering him to do this, as he claims.

One can’t help but think it more likely Doty launched a disinformation campaign (or a campaign to validate the conspiracy theory!) on his own. It would be strange indeed if the military consciously helped fuel a false story that implicated it in a cover up.

A filmmaker and conspiracy theorist named Linda Howe claimed Doty personally confirmed to her the existence of the Majestic 12, that the military was actually leaking the truth, that Doty had promised to release thousands of feet of secret footage of crashed alien ships and even an interview with a surviving extraterrestrial. Doty and the Air Force denied everything Howe said.  

Greer is not only a believer in the Majestic 12, he claims to know its size and sentiments:

There are probably 200 or 300 who really know what’s going on, but only a couple of dozen who are key to the operation, and I know who a few of those people are… there are a number of them who feel that the time has come for disclosure on this. About one-third of the elements within MJ-12 feel that way.  

Based on one of Greer’s sources (actually, the friend of a source; see “Eisenhower Briefing by MAJI”), the Majestic 12 released the Majestic 12 papers as a way to “test the public’s reaction” to the truth. This seems a bit at odds with the Majestic 12’s purpose, but not unimaginable if it was leaked.

According to Greer, this organization operates independently of intelligence agencies like the CIA, of military heads like the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and of course political bodies like Congress. “The US Government, as you and I think of it, and other governments, don’t know about this subject 99 per cent of the time.”

He also claims the Majestic 12 spreads disinformation by setting up hoaxes that the media can expose easily, all to convince the populace that extraterrestrial visits are mythological. Nor does he rule out overactive imaginations. “I’ve gone to hundreds of gatherings and UFO meetings and I would say 90 to 99 per cent of everything I hear and see is utter and complete rubbish,” Greer says.

Greer believes the Majestic 12 is an “international” body, with players in major media outlets. This has allegedly allowed them to cover up the truth around the world, “them” being those “who want to keep this quiet” within the organization, particularly “the older members.” The members that Greer apparently knows, who are giving him information, are sabotaging those efforts.

One might question the ability of such a group to prevent all media, governments, space programs, and astronomical observatories around the globe from either receiving or publicizing hard evidence of alien visits. Surely given the sheer numbers of UFO sightings to investigate, the organization would either have to be everywhere at once, or far more massive than Greer believes. An extraordinary claim, indeed.

Extraordinary Evidence?

More bothersome questions lurk in the back of any rational mind.

Greer and others have testimony from military and government personnel, but why not astronomers, cosmologists, astrophysicists? That is, those with the most advanced technology and greatest experience observing space? Does the Majestic 12 control the hundreds of astronomical observatories around the world (and in space), from Centennial in Idaho to Sankt Andreasberg in Germany?

Are SETI and other well-equipped scientific bodies whose mission is to find evidence of alien life, but haven’t, simply fronts of those wishing to hide the truth? Or are aliens clever enough to avoid their gaze?

If Majestic 12 members are in contact with Greer and trying to expose the truth, why does his “Best Available Evidence” not include more close-up, high-quality photographs of alien beings or craft? (I only write “more” because they do have pictures of Ata). Surely such photos must exist, and whistleblowers in the Majestic 12 would be able to get their hands on them. The fact that many would dismiss such photos as fraudulent is irrelevant. A truth teller would make them public regardless.

Similarly, why does his evidence include so few government documents that discuss investigations of what the authors conclude to be extraterrestrial life or technology? Greer’s documents mention “flying saucers” and “UFOs,” but nearly always within a context of a government agency describing what’s been sighted or unsure as to what’s been observed (i.e., “unidentified”). The descriptions are strange and intriguing, but missing the all-important conclusion. 

Where are the internal memos of the Majestic 12 that discuss observations and investigations that actually assign extraterrestrial origins to specific events? True, Greer has one NSA document that speaks of “extraterrestrial messages” (radio signals from space from an unknown origin) and of course he features the original Majestic 12 papers, but why is there not more? Again, it’s true that “even if he had them, they would just be called fakes,” but that is beside the point. Why are there so few papers a skeptic can call fraudulent, if whistleblowers within the mysterious organization are leaking the truth? Shouldn’t we have better evidence, more evidence?

And shouldn’t we have more physical evidence, rather than just papers or photographs? That is, parts of alien ships, clothing, or flesh that can be examined by any researcher that wants to prove or disprove its extraterrestrial nature?    

Further, if aliens are willing to let Greer take a photograph, why not let it be a decent one? Observe his photograph:

True, it’s allegedly a trans-dimensional being, but surely a decent photo is within their power. They must have the ability to fully enter our dimension, or we would have no bodies (like Ata?) and no craft debris for the Majestic 12 to intercept and spirit away. If aliens will reveal themselves to Greer and colleagues, why not to the rest of the world? What response can possibly hold up to criticism? That humanity isn’t ready?

If the aliens do not believe humanity is ready, why are their ships constantly invading our skies, crashing into our deserts? From 1959-2008, UK citizens reported 11,141 UFOs (221 were given no official explanation from the UK government, due to insufficient information). Even if only 1% wasn’t “rubbish,” that’s 111 actual extraterrestrial sightings in about 50 years over a single nation, which speaks to utterly laughable extraterrestrial incompetence and clumsiness. Even 0.1% would equal 11 embarrassing accidents.

According to the Syracuse New Times, between 2000 and 2013, there were nearly 70,000 UFO sightings in North America; the National UFO Reporting Center had 93,000 reports by late 2014, recorded over a twenty-year period. Were only 0.1% of these sightings otherworldly, that would be 70 legitimate sightings in 13 years, and 93 over 20 years. 0.01% would be 7 and 9 sightings, respectively.

If aliens are seeking to observe Earth and its creatures without detection, they are inept.

If they occasionally allow themselves to be seen or allow a blurry picture to test the world’s reaction, surely advanced beings would understand hysteria is bred best by boogeymen lurking in the dark, not by facts made plain in the light. Their observations would have to conclude that humans fear most what they don’t understand, not what they do…or perhaps conspiracy theorists are right, and aliens think revealing themselves in a more convincing way would mean chaos, the collapse of traditional power structures, religions, etc. Sadly, there is no way to prove the motives of unproven beings.   

If Greer does not think the world is ready to see aliens as he has, then his mission to expose the truth is a fraud, and he is no better than the Majestic 12 or any other force aiming to conceal alien visits.

“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” Astronomer Carl Sagan, echoing others, popularized this phrase. David Hume in the 1740s said a wise man “proportions his belief to the evidence.”

Surely aliens visiting Earth is an extraordinary claim. What constitutes “extraordinary evidence” will differ for each person.

Some will find the testimony of highly-qualified military, intelligence, and government personnel enough to believe, despite our scientific understanding of how terribly unreliable eyewitness testimony really is; for others, stories of abduction and how people grow very ill afterwards; for others, the massive number of photographs and videos of crop circles (even radioactive ones), saucers, or lights in the sky, despite the possibility of forgery or simpler explanations like satellites, drones, meteors, flares, aircraft, weather balloons, toys, birds; for others, government documents specifically discussing the Majestic 12 and extraterrestrials, despite the same possibility of forgery; for still others, physical evidence that can be scientifically examined by any researcher interested, including the staunchest skeptics.

There is surely only one thing constituting extraordinary evidence for each Earthling: A public landing of an alien craft and the emergence of alien life, for all to see, not just the few. Until that happens, we have no extraordinary evidence, and thus no proof of an extraordinary claim.

For more from the author, subscribe and follow or read his books.

As hard as it is to imagine, American conservatism (and even liberalism) of the 1930s and 1940s was marked by a staunch hatred of the Jews, quite the opposite of the undying, unquestioning support for Israel today.

Adolf Hitler’s persecution of the Jews was well-known in the United States, though President Franklin Roosevelt and his cabinet hesitated to criticize it. In 1934, a resolution in the Senate called for the U.S. government to condemn Hitler’s early discriminatory policies and push for the restoration of Jewish rights, but Roosevelt’s State Department ensured the resolution disappeared in committee (see Offner, American Appeasement). When Roosevelt’s secretary of labor requested priority in immigration be granted to victims of racial and religious persecution, the State Department rejected the idea.

Even after Kristallnacht, November 9, 1938, during which the Nazis murdered dozens of Jews, burned thousands of synagogues, homes, and businesses, and rounded up tens of thousands to be shipped off to concentration camps, most Americans refused compassion. The events were reported in the major American newspapers.

Many Americans feared Jews would steal their jobs, but also widely regarded them as racially inferior Christ-killers; some created myths about Jews taking over the world, which partially inspired Hitler.

There was also fear that Jewish refugees were Nazi spies. “Among the refugees there are some spies,” Roosevelt warned in 1940. The Saturday Evening Post wrote that “disguised as refugees, Nazi agents have penetrated all over the world, as spies, fifth columnists, propagandists, or secret commercial agents.” According to historian Max Paul Friedman, no Jewish refugee was ever discovered to be a spy.

Still, a survey of college students from December 12, 1938 asked if the U.S. should offer a haven for Jewish refugees. 68.8% said no. A January 20, 1939 survey that asked if the government should allow in “10,000 refugee children from Germany — most of them Jewish” saw 61% of Americans polled say no.

By 1938, over 300,000 Germans, mostly Jews, had applied to enter the U.S. Only 20,000 were allowed in. The U.S. rejected anyone who might end up on welfare; many Jews lost everything to the Nazis and would need public assistance. Anne Frank’s family was rejected.

A ship carrying Jewish refugees was turned away on the American shore because of strict immigration quotas. Some of the refugees onboard later died in the Holocaust.

These barriers ensured that the immigration limit on Germans went unfilled until 1938, even though hundreds of thousands wanted in. The 1938-1939 quota for Germans was 27,370. Meanwhile, the quota for Britain and Ireland was 65,721. Though it was an era of high unemployment and it was reasonable to worry about competition for the few jobs available, the fact that many Americans did not alter their views in the face of Hitler’s barbarity is highly disturbing, yet predictable in a time of virulent racism and anti-semitism.

Today, the story is quite similar. 12 million Syrians, half of them children, have fled their homes in the Syrian Civil War that began in 2011. 4 million have left Syria. 700,000 have traveled to Europe in 2015 alone. Having left everything behind to escape the violence and destruction in Syria, they are desperate for shelter, warm clothing, food, clean water, medicine, etc. 3,200 have died on their journey.

The Obama administration will take in 10,000 Syrian refugees, an almost meaningless number in the face of the crisis. 75,000 refugees will be accepted from elsewhere in the world.

There is a huge push from conservatives to stop even this quota. Half of U.S. governors declared refugees unwelcome. The terror attack in Paris on Friday contributed to the intensity of this opposition.

Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz declared that allowing Syrian Muslim refugees into the U.S. is “lunacy,” that they should be sent to “majority-Muslim countries,” but that “Christians who are being targeted for genocide, for persecution, Christians who are being beheaded or crucified, we should be providing safe haven to them.” Cruz insisted “there is no meaningful risk of Christians committing acts of terror,” ignoring the horrific attacks by extremist Christians in recent memory; Americans are twice as likely to die at the hands of right-wing American terrorists than Muslim jihadists.

Of the 68 people charged in the U.S. for links to ISIS, 55 were U.S. citizens (44 born in America).

Fellow politicians echoed his heartless bigotry, in just the latest chapter of increasing anti-Muslim hatred in America. Many citizens believe all Muslims to be extremist, violent, dangerous, a stereotype they do not often apply to Christians after Christian extremist violence. This writer saw one grammatically-challenged Kansan post on social media:

The pampered Americans have no idea what is going on here. You are not educated at all as to the danger of these immigrants. They will rape our women and destroy our culture. It is foolish and naive to say “let’s be generous and let them all come in. It is the stupidest thing I have ever heard it. You are completely ignorant of the facts of the matter. Would you invite a rapist who wants to rape your wife and kill you in your sleep into your home? This is the way of the Muslims. Dude, they want to conquer the world and their religion is Satanic. Absolutely Satanic. I wish we could prevent all Muslim men from coming over here. Actually, the children are so brainwashed I would be okay with not allowing any Muslims over here.

53% of Americans, according to one poll after the Paris attacks, oppose accepting any refugees from Syria.

Apparently many Americans are having great difficulty grasping the idea that Syrian refugees are men, women, and children fleeing ISIS (which has committed genocide not just against Christians, but also Yezidi, Shi’a Muslims, and even fellow Sunni Muslims), fleeing the oppressive Islamic dictatorship of Syria, and fleeing the war between them. 250,000 have died in Syria so far.

Where surveys have been conducted, Muslims in the region overwhelmingly despise ISIS.

Contrary to the claims of Ben Carson and other conservatives, the majority of the refugees are not young males. Males 18-59 make up 22.1% of the 4 million refugees (males 12-17 make up 6.6%). Of all the refugees the U.S. has accepted thus far, only 2% have been single males of combat age. The State Department is rightly focusing on the most vulnerable: families with children.

Fears of terrorists sneaking in with the refugees are severely misplaced, as Fusion notes. Since 9/11, of the more than 750,000 refugees taken in by the U.S., not one has been arrested for domestic terrorism. Only three have been arrested for financially supporting foreign extremist groups (and only one of these spoke of attacking the U.S.). None were from Syria. About 2,000 Syrians have already entered the U.S. refugee program without incident.

Further, a great many Middle Easterners, non-refugees, have migrated to the U.S. since 9/11:

The U.S. has admitted 1.5 million migrants from the Middle East since September 11, 2001. The terrorist attacks that have occurred since 9/11 have been committed either by American natives or non-refugee immigrants.

A small threat exists in any migration program (even though immigrants are actually less likely to commit crimes than the native-born), but it is not worsened by an inflow of people with refugee status, who see a more rigorous screening process.

The Migration Policy Institute notes:

[The] refugee resettlement program is the least likely avenue for a terrorist to choose. Refugees who are selected for resettlement to the United States go through a painstaking, many-layered review before they are accepted. The FBI, Department of Homeland Security, State Department, and national intelligence agencies independently check refugees’ biometric data against security databases. The whole process typically takes 18-24 months, with high hurdles for security clearance.

As The Hill reported, “A Department of Homeland Security official stated that there is no evidence that refugees accepted into the U.S. are more likely to commit terrorism than anyone else in the country” and that refugee settlement in the Middle East creates a greater risk of refugee radicalization. Better resettlement conditions and distance from the beating heart of extremism contribute to this.

Though not perfect, the refugee path is “the most stringent security process for entering the United States,” as a State Department spokesman said.

When the potential risk is minimal, and the potential human good enormous, the ethics of the matter are plain.

Conservatives who believe in the preservation of gun ownership rights, despite the risk of terror attacks by native-born right-wing extremists, should understand this.

It is interesting that some conservatives, who would perhaps be quickest to compare ISIS to Hitler, are also the ones most ardently refusing to aid the victims of ISIS. They should be the ones pushing hardest to allow in refugees. The fact that many Americans did not alter their views in the face of ISIS’s barbarity is highly disturbing, yet predictable in a time of virulent racism and anti-Muslim hatred.

For more from the author, subscribe and follow or read his books.

On November 13, 2015, a juvenile court judge in Utah rescinded his order that an 9-month-old foster child be removed from the home of a lesbian couple and placed in the home of a straight couple, citing research that says children experience greater emotional and mental stability with heterosexual parents. While the baby girl won’t be taken from the couple at this time, a hearing December 4th will determine her fate.  

The alleged research, which the judge hasn’t bothered to make public, reminded me of a study out of the University of Chicago published a weeks ago that found children raised in religious homes are less likely than children from non-religious homes to share with others; they were also more likely to judge and punish others for disagreeable behaviors.

I suppose foster children should therefore be removed from religious homes.

Clearly, even if the mystery study the judge cites is actually legitimate, it is not reason enough to remove children from foster homes. It does not constitute neglect or abuse.

And it is fueled not by concern for children, but by religious hysteria over homosexuality, in the same way conservative terror over gay marriage was not actually driven by a legitimate threat to heterosexual marriage, the so-called “institution” or “tradition.”

Many religious Americans perceive homosexuality as “unnatural” or “a perversion” based on ancient writings of primitive Middle Eastern tribes. Within the Torah, the Christian Bible, and the Koran, we find these descriptions of homosexuality, as well as barbaric edicts from God calling for the execution of homosexuals.

Fortunately, most people (but not all) no longer take such edicts seriously, preferring to focus on more ethical commandments about loving others and judging not. Many of these individuals nevertheless maintain homosexuality is a “sin” because of these ancient texts, a sin that must be “resisted,” “forgiven,” or even “cured.”

Biological research paints a very different picture, one that leads any reasonable person to conclude there is nothing more natural than homosexuality in the human species.

Homosexuality has been observed in many animal species, not just humans. It is often a very small percentage of a group’s population, as with humans, but it persists over generations. And it can actually more accurately be called “bisexuality,” rather than absolute “homosexuality.”

Male lions have sex with each other often. The entire species of dwarf chimpanzees practices bisexuality. Male dolphins sometimes stay with their male mates for years, as can killer whales. Many female Laysan Albatroses pleasure each other and raise children together, as do the males. They are “married” for life. 4-5% of geese and duck couples are homosexual couples. 8% of male domesticated sheep prefer other males, ignoring females completely; their hypothalamus, which releases sex hormones, is smaller than straight male sheep.

Petter Bockman of the University of Oslo, highlighting the difficulty of proving a negative statement like “No geckos are gay,” says, “No species has been found in which homosexual behaviour has not been shown to exist, with the exception of species that never have sex at all, such as sea urchins and aphis.”

Some 1,500 species so far have been researched and found to engage in homosexual intercourse.  

“How would this contribute to the survival of a species?” many ask. Isn’t it unnatural and counterproductive in that sense?

Simple as this sounds, some animals presumably do it because it feels good. This has nothing to do with reproduction. Female Japanese Macaques have lesbian sex much more often than sex with males, and have been observed experimenting with each other to “maximize the genital sensations.”

Other animals, like male fruit flies, simply try to mate with any member of their species the instant they are born, desperate to quickly pass on genes before death. Male flour beetles deposit sperm in each other and then mate with a female to increase their chances of passing on someone’s genes.

In some species, female couples are a response to a shortage of males — raising youth as a couple helps the young survive better than going it alone. Bonobos have a lot of both gay and straight sex, not to mention oral sex, hand jobs, orgies, kissing, and sex with youths.

Scientist think it reduces stress and cements social bonds — it makes the group feel close. Some scientists suggest homosexual males might, by avoiding females, inadvertently maintain female fertility or the female desire to mate. However, some evolutionists suggest it may be a form of population control. There is much more to learn.         

But how did homosexuality arise in the first place? While homosexuality still may not seem conducive to evolving and reproducing, even after noting most creatures that enjoy gay sex still reproduce with a member of the opposite sex, the same can be said of many mutations in genes: Most genetic mutations are not “helpful” in evolution. That is the nature of random mutation. Some will be beneficial, and will be passed on rapidly, others unhelpful, passed on in limited fashion, or eliminated from the gene pool entirely.

Homosexuality has not been eliminated, perhaps because it is helpful in a small way, as noted. In any case, evolution keeps “unhelpful” mutations in check. If all bottlenose dolphins were homosexual, and had no desire for heterosexual sex, the species would fail. But if bisexuality is the norm, or if only 5%, 7%, or 8% of the creatures reject straight sex, the species will survive.

What is clear is that there are genes that determine sexual orientation, discovered through genetic mapping and sociological studies, like looking at twins separated at birth that both turn out to be homosexual. Identical twins are much more likely to have the same sexual orientation as fraternal twins–see Levay’s work below.

A geneticist named Dean Hammer lead the way in this research in the 1990s, discovering a genetic marker on X chromosomes that homosexual men had, but (nearly all) heterosexual men did not. A breakthrough study last year looked at over 800 gay brothers, including non-identical twins, and found similar layouts of genes on the X chromosome and chromosome 8 that aren’t usually a feature in straight men.

A study in 2015 looked at 47 pairs of identical twins and found that homosexual males have a genetic structure difference in nine places compared to their straight identical twins. The presence of these differences predict homosexuality with an accuracy of 70%.  

One might also look into the work of Simon Levay, who discovered in the 1990s that a region of the gay male hypothalamus is smaller than in straight men–just like domesticated male sheep that show homosexual behavior.

What notice when studying all this is that scientists have not yet ruled out environmental factors in homosexuality, as there is increasing evidence that your environment can actually change your genes. Religious persons who insist homosexuality is a choice may delight in this, until the realization dawns that the altering of the epigenome via external influences doesn’t actually constitute a conscious choice.

What is clear is that genetics are everything; that homosexuality is, to an undeniable degree, an integral part of what it means to be human. The only thing that stands in the way of accepting this, for many people, is religion.

For more from the author, subscribe and follow or read his books.