Two gay people of the same sex can not currently have children that are decended from both of them, are you suggesting that they can?
If you are meaning that gay men have children with gay women, then maybe they do, but it's possible that gay men and gay women are gay through different causes.
So no, there isn't enough data. Otherwise there wouldn't be so many studies being done on the subject.
Presumably the person/animal the OP was referring to is called a gayling because it's parents were gay. If you RTFA, you'll see that it suggests that gay couples could have offspring using a technique similar to the one performed with the mice.
I'm not trying to be offensive to anyone -- I'm just saying that such a procedure has the potential to clear up the whole nature/nurture debate in the case of homosexuality.
Why? You may belive that there is some fundamental difference between humans and other animals, but myself and many others do not. That doesn't make us uncivilised.
On the other hand, I don't think we as a species need any additional vectors for reproducing -- we seem to do well enough as it is...
I agree that is the correct question to be asking, but I don't think the answer is clear cut yet. I'm not a 'climate change denier' either. I certainly think that it is prudent to cut emmisions as much as possible in the mean time, as indications are that our emmisions are at least partly to blame for observed changes in the climate.
I think anyone who states climate predictions with certain terms like 'no' or 'yes' is jumping the gun. There are papers out there that indicate that by pumping GHGs into the atmosphere, we are holding back an impending ice-age. They are in the minority, and I certainly wouldn't like to stake my reputation on them, but they are science, and they aren't all based on doctored data like some 'climate denier' papers are. The fact is, the answer to your question really comes down to the assumptions you make in creating your model. Wwe have to validate more of these assumptions before it can be definitively answered.
The confusion of a staff member is measured by the length of his memos. -- New York Times, Jan. 20, 1981