text:
← Non-replicating lawyers
Gene genealogies vs population splits →
Gay genes
A recent paper discussed the results of a GWAS study of same -sex behavior, based on data from the UK Biobank. The data wasn't ideal – it was based on self-reporting, and asked whether the respondent had ever had a same-sex experience, rather than trying to detect orientation… But that's life.
They found two SNPs that influenced both male and female homosexuality, two that affected males only, one that affected females only. All had very small but statistically significant effects.
If we had lots of SNPs, we could look for trends ( are they predominantly expressed on certain tissues or processes ?) but with only 4 in males and 3 in females, not really possible. It does look as if the genetic architecture of homosexuality only partially overlaps between the sexes ( 0.63) – usually, say for things like height or iq, the overlap is close to 100%. So the genetics, like every observation, suggests that male and female homosexuality are qualitatively different. Yet the degree of shared genetic influence is also interesting – I don't think it would be predicted by most strategy models.
The fraction of the variance influenced by these few SNPs is low, less than 1%. The contribution of all common SNPs is larger, estimated to be between 8% and 25%. Still small compared to traits like height and IQ, but then we knew that the heritability of homosexuality is not terribly high, from twin studies and such – political views are more heritable.
So gene influence homosexuality, but then they influence everything. Does it look as if the key causal link ( assuming that there is one) is genetic? No, but then we knew that already, from high discordance for homosexuality in MZ twins.
Most interesting to me were the genetic correlations between same-sex behavior and various other traits.
The genes correlated with male homosexuality are also correlated ( at a statistically significant level) with risk-taking, cannabis use, schizophrenia, ADHD, major depressive disorder, loneliness, and number of sex partners. For female homosexuals, risk-taking, smoking, cannabis use, subjective well-being (-), schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, ADHD, major depressive disorder, loneliness, openness to experience, and number of sex partners.
Generally, the traits genetically correlated with homosexuality are bad things. As far as I can see, they look like noise, rather than any kind of genetic strategy. Mostly, they accord with what we already knew about male and female homosexuals: both are significantly more likely to have psychiatric disorders, far more likely to use drugs. The mental-illness association maybe looks stronger in lesbians. The moderately-shared genetic architecture seems compatible with a noise model.
The strategy ideas never made sense ( in terms of a workable kin-selection, sexually antagonistic, or other genetic model) , but I think this study makes that clearer.
Find that homosexuality was genetically correlated with various kinds of unpleasantness was apparently an issue in the preparation and publication of this paper. The authors were at some pains to avoid hurting the feelings of the gay community, since avoiding hurting feelings is the royal road to Truth, as shown by Galileo and Darwin.
116 Responses to Gay genes
Another possible clue: I noticed all the gay bars ive been to were comprised of majority nonwhite customers. Research seems to confirm black and latino men are 50% more likely to "identify as gay." The real numbers are probably higher, since those communities are actually more opposed to the lifestyle than whites. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/addiction-in-society/201210/are-minority-men-more-likely-be-gay-why My theory was female dating preference combined with testosterone levels lead to more experimentation out of desperation. A man of color is the least searched for on dating sites, last I checked. Difficulties in dating women, high testosterone, higher propensity of child abuse, and male mentors returning from incarceration with homosexual experiences under their belt could create a decent enough environmental motive for abnormal sexual attraction. Milo Yiannopolous made an interesting argument that gay men have been forcing themselves to be bisexual for millennia, otherwise theyd have been removed from the gene pool. Maybe they will be now. Unless of course its a gay disease like you've proposed.
Maybe black and Latino gays go to bars more because it's less accepted in their communities. It may be the only place they can go to meet other gays of their ethnic background. It would be interesting to know what fraction of gays settle into fixed relationships. You'd expect fewer if the family and friends were strongly disapproving.
Being a white female non gay I can't comment on the desperation theory. But I have read that in pretty much any situation where there are few women (prisons, single sex boarding schools and, at least formerly, navy ships) the men do seem to follow a desperation strategy.
Yamamoto says:
Still seems like gay neighborhoods like Boystown (in Lakeview East) in Chicago are disproportionately white, but I might be wrong.
BerkeleyGuy says:
You are correct, as is the Castro District in San Francisco. Black gay men just don't live there.
reziac says:
In animals, homosexual behavior is basically a juvenile trait; normally the animal matures and thereafter such behavior is just opportunistic when better options are absent. Occurs to me that if the same is true in humans, then there's probably some failure to mature in the hormonal system, which in turn leads to both the various negative traits and the homosexuality.
not in rams it's not. or rather, a certain % of them. it's very perplexing to me how no one, not one millionaire or weird Saudi or rich religious fundamentalist out there funds research into this. seems like a massive layup for the Right in finding a virus link.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-2826.2009.01828.x
I'd like to know if the affected rams were twins or triplets, and the gender of their sibling lambs. Guessing there's a shift dependent on that. (Not going to buy the article to read the rest of it.) Kinda like how longer ring finger in human females is from androgen exposure in utero, and tends to correlate with more-masculine traits.
One could wonder if there's a similar effect in other species' mixed-gender twins or triplets. By the time one reaches larger litters, any effect probably evens out.
My understanding is that in wild animals — (making a possible exception for genetically screwed up domestic animals like sheep) — obligate homosexuality is essentially unknown. They may engage in various types of homosexual behavior on various occasions for various reasons, but never at the expense of normal reproductive sex. So there really is no good animal analogue for committed human homosexuality.
Jason y says:
Humans can and do commit to self-defeating behaviors that may have proved expedient in the short-term, e.g., as a Min-Max strategy on the playground, or as a political stance, e.g, intellectuals committing to failed theories, or carpenters to "their way", but most commonly they do it out of mindless habit, I.e., further investment in exploring the space of solutions doesnt (seem to) make sense. Much of what we do is a cobbled together collection of first-guesses that congeal into habits. That's why genes matter so much even in Taleb's hyperdimensional imagination: where we start looking matters the most.
How many committed homosexuals occasionally feel attracted to members of the opposite sex? We dont know, and for reasons having to do with self-labelling, status, and self-esteem, they arent going tell us. From what I have observed of lesbians, the answer is "sometimes", but because they know they cant win the male's affections theyll often aggressively deny it. Their identity is built out of sour grapes.
Blogger Severian: "The strongest force in human affairs isn't love or hate, it's inertia."
kpkinsunnyphiladelphia says:
In my wild oats days, I had relationships with two "lesbian" women, In the first, I think I was her last heterosexual encounter and she didn't seem that into me or it. I liked here, she was quite attractive, and I wanted to keep it going, but she decided man were not fore her. The other was already in a "committed" lesbian relationship, and told me that she needed a man from time to time. A small sample size, to be sure, but there you go.
Labayu says:
Seems to be the case among teenage boys in Morocco to whom there is little if any safe access to teenage girls. This is part of what made Morocco so appealing to the likes of William S. Burroughs and Allen Ginsberg.
We know that "gay face" is real from personal experience but studies have also shown this intuition is true. People are pretty decent at detecting homosexuality from looks xor voice in males.
That associated stuff must be genetic.
greg kai says:
I don't think so: pathogens, development defect or other physiological events can certainly be detected visually, on the face or the body. Polio, smallpox, thyroid problem,…you name it…
Gay face do not say anything regarding genetic origin, but if you have a gay/straigth homozygots twin pair , and the gay twin can be reliably guessed from a (cleaned up) mug shot, then you can deduce that gay face is a physical sign of whatever non-genetic incident is causing homosexuality, instead of a marker for genetic suceptibiity to such incident. The fact that homozygots often differ in gayness shows that it's genetic suceptibility to an external factor, not direct genetic causation
oldmiseryguts says:
Most straight men can pick a gay man out fairly easily, usually just by facial features (not always), there's always finger lengths, hair whorl pattern and posture speech etc. Most lesbians I've met or worked with are generally just really unattractive women who have given up on getting a man, most lesbians go both ways whereas gay men tend to be much more gay than bi sexual.
Being gay isn't inherited, end of story.
There are some correlated variables that confuse the issue.
Left handed, schizophrenic, having more older brothers, being in love with a monkey, getting bitch slapped by clowns at a young age, the list keeps growing.
Here is how genetics works. Mutations that put a small hit on fitness don't spread very far. They are rare. A great and wonderful scientific undertaking was completed a while back that was going to make the world a better place. The Human Genome Project. We were supposed to then find all those terrible nasty mutations and fix them. Kids would dance, parties would happen, music and balloons would proliferate.
Didn't happen. It seems that genes that take a small hit on fitness are rare. Who woulda thunk. Now a gene that makes you lust over X hole rather than Y hole and X hole never makes babies is going to have a HUGE hit on fitness. So homosexuals are somewhere around 2 percent of the population. It isn't genetic.
The cause of homosexuality isn't known. My guess is it's a developmental quirk that happens very early, possibly in the fetal stage, but who knows. My point is simple. Inherited conditions that have a huge hit on fitness with no counter balancing positive effect never remain as common as homosexuality is. That is how evolution works.
The first two weeks following conception are filled with staggering array of metamorphoses. A two percent error rate is either good enough or a miracle in itself, and if it's higher perhaps spontaneous abortion deals with that.
Unirt says:
It is consistent with the noise model, but can't many of the negative traits be directly caused by homosexuality? The genetic correlations don't rule that out, right? I imagine that if you find yourself in an ostracized position you may be more susceptible to (perhaps adaptive) anxiety and depression and also maladaptive wireheading like taking drugs. This would explain neuroticism, low life satisfaction and smoking, but doesn't explain scizophrenia, ADHD or risk-taking (depressed people are neither more nor less likely to take risks). Would the noise model of homosexuality predict IQ to be negatively assotiated with being gay? The evidence there is seems to point to the other direction, if simply because more intelligent people are more likely to admit to being gay?
"I imagine that if you find yourself in an ostracized position you may be more susceptible to (perhaps adaptive) anxiety and depression and also maladaptive wireheading like taking drugs."
Surely so to some extent. I think we can be confident that the more "blank slate" inclined will hang their hats on that peg and continue to demand that the loonies run the asylum.
It opens up the possibility that homosexuality is not the cause of the behavioural and emotional problems, but simply part of a pattern of which the non-reproduction-oriented sexual behaviour is a part. In short, a series of errors. However, there may be upsides: artistic sensibilities? emotional awareness? It is worth looking more widely to get the full picture, which at the moment looks like being entirely negative, or at the very least, a very poor strategy.
Dieter Kief says:
" (…) homosexuality is not the cause of the behavioural and emotional problems, but simply part of a pattern of which the non-reproduction-oriented sexual behaviour is a part."
Yep, this would mean, that seen from the biological perspective, homosexuality would rather be a solution than a problem.
To split hairs a bit, but a set of errors may be more precise. A set of common errors, as in the set as a whole is common, while anyone person having the whole set is rare. Within that set, subsets manifest as degrees of homosexual behavior, depression, openness, etc. In the overlap of these sets we find homosexuals are varying intensity.
That's something that does not come up in these discussions. Homosexuality in males seems to be a spectrum. At one end are the always and forever exclusively gay. At the other end are males who play on whatever field is available. There's also a dimension to it, with someone like Lindsay Graham being a different type of homosexual from Milo Yiannopoulos.
"Homosexuality in males seems to be a spectrum."
Yes. And that might as well correlate with the social aspects of homosexuality, which means, it is – up to a maybe even_varying_ degree, itself flexible. Homosexuality = a place, where individuals and biology meet under varying social, cultural and individual circumstances? So homosexuality would be – at least at its biological outskirts/ rims – something quite fluid.
To be even more specific: male homosexuality seems to be a syndrome, that is, a collection of symptoms or signs that usually happen together. Sexual behavior is only one of the traits in the syndrome; not everyone has every trait in the cluster, nor every trait to the same intensity. Being a syndrome doesn't tell you what causes it (genetics, infection, etc.), of course, or even if it's necessarily a single root cause. The data could also be muddied by men having sex with men when there are effectively no women available (prisons, military units, migrant camps, etc.), male prostitution or abuse, or when the main motivation is aggressive dominance rather than sexual desire per se.
Our host has noted more than once that there's a different distribution of sexual preference between male and female homosexuals– females show a smooth bell curve-like distribution from "attracted only to men" through "sometimes have sex with other women" to "50-50" to "mostly women, but sometimes men" to obligate lesbians. Whereas, with men, there are many more obligate gay men than bisexuals. That male pattern doesn't match well with the cause being an accumulation of genetic variations, or with sexual attraction as a gradient along one axis (say, due to a gradient in sex hormone levels across the population, or disinhibition in general). It does fit with an environmental cause, such as a virus (perhaps with certain genetic patterns being much more susceptible to the syndrome than others).
This is not true, that there are many m ore gay men than bisexuals. There are at least as many bisexual men as gay men, as polls of sexuality in the youngest generation (Generation Z? Where are we now? sorry…) are confirming.
I can add my subjective testimony to this fact. I'd put the percentage of truly bisexual men at around 6-10%, with another 3-6% being gay.
The epidemiology of AIDS is not consistent with your statement.
Hypoborean says:
You are correct that if the numbers for Gen Z applied in 1980 the epidemiology of AIDS would be very different. However, that doesn't mean that M's statement is incorrect, seeing as 2019 is not 1980.
Gen Z having a massively higher rate of self-reported male bisexuality than previous generations is easily supported by declining social stigma towards male bisexuality.
Female bisexuality was and is fetishized (encouraged) while male bisexuality was very strongly stigmatized. Straight men did not avoid dating bisexual women (on the expectation that they would be more open to having FFM threesomes), while straight women did avoid dating bisexual men (on the expectation that they would become fully gay). Since there was a social cost to experimenting for males and a social benefit to experimenting for females, the rates of female and male apparent bisexuality strongly diverged.
In the last decade as LGBT identities in general have become very strongly accepted / high status in youth culture, the social cost of male-male experimentation has declined significantly, which is why we are seeing the emergence of male bisexuals.
To summarize: the kids really are different, and you're making a big mistake in assuming facts from the 1980s disprove the survey data + the lived experiences that people sub age 30 (myself, and I'm assuming M) can attest to.
I'm not saying that the distributions between the two genders are the SAME. We still have a lot more "obligate" gays than "obligate" lesbians, to use the terminology preferred on this blog. But a major social force that was pushing a gender disparity in the rate of bisexuality (the fuzzy middle zone that you would logically expect to be very open to social pressure, since its members have the OPTION to cave to social pressure without forgoing sex) has dissipated, and we are seeing the in-some-ways-predictable, in-some-ways surprising result of that.
Important addendum:
Within the "obligate" gay community there is a notorious "top shortage", meaning more prefer to be penetrated than prefer to penetrate. Since the penetrated partner is far more likely to contract HIV (women, in the case of straight sex, and "bottoms", in the case of gay sex, with gay bottoms being more at risk than straight women…also note this is why HIV/AIDS is very rare among "obligate" lesbians), if the rare bisexuals of the 1980s were dropping by the community, it is likely they were predominantly performing the role of "top", which would limit the escape of HIV from the primary infected communities through bisexual men.
In 1980, the number of people identifying as "transgender" was zero. Seeing as 2019 is not 1980, transgender is still a nonsense label. The point being, the alleged spike in bisexuality in Gen Z is without foundation and most likely reflects the level of agit-prop in the schools.
In 1980, the number of people identifying as "transgender" was zero.
Tell it to Myra Breckinridge.
That's true, but there are other reasons for that.
Again, read the latest studies on self-reported sexual experiences of the most recent generation. The number of men reporting same-sex behavior has doubled relative to the previous generation, without a corresponding increase in the number of men identifying as gay. All the increase has come from men self-identifying as bisexual.
When homosexuality is tabooed, it seems that bisexual men adopt a straight lifestyle and self-identity. Now that taboo has seriously eroded, and behaviors are shifting.
Correct my reasoning here if it seems wrong. On another blog a devoutly religious male asked how could the seeming common popularity of oral sex could have ever developed, from an evolutionary point of view.
I had never thought about it before. But then, it seems that humans are more interested in sex of any type than say, cats or dogs. Female mammals are generally only receptive when they're in heat. And the males are only interested in females that are in heat.
It makes sense, why waste time and energy if the possibility of conception is low.
This is not the case in humans. I don't know anything at all on the subject from a scientific point of view but I hazarded a guess that it might have improved pair bonding. With strong pair bonding there is less temptation to get involved with someone other than your mate. Such behaviour would affect the stability of the tribe.
Sex has become partly recreational for humans.
It might also explain homosexuality, at least partly. It's negative from an evolutionary point of view but anything that stabilized the tribal unit might be selected for, even if weakly.
The questioner agreed with my answer (I didn't mention homosexuality) but wanted more input.
But everyone else on the thread was distracted by politics and iPhones.
Positive correlation with # of children?
I think this correlation would disappear if you controlled for age.
As people get older, their chance of having a sexual encounter with the same sex increases. Their chance of having a child also increases. So generally speaking, older people will have had more gay sex and more children.
This is one of the weaknesses of defining homosexuality as "has had a same sex experience".
The number of children trait is limited to women 45+ and men 55+.
Those are puzzling ones. It's possible it's a misprint (reverse-coding?). If you look at the fulltext, the phenotype correlations with # of children is as expected: https://geneticsexbehavior.info/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/ganna190830.pdf#page=2 Homosexuals of both sexs have less children than 0%/heterosexuals, and the effect is stronger the larger % is (from 1.6 down to as low as ~0.3). As the authors comment, "This reproductive deficit raises questions about the evolutionary maintenance of the trait, but we do not address these here." How that can translate into a positive correlation with number of children, I am not sure.
I'm honestly surprised they don't discuss this. If the genes are positively correlated with number of kids that would be huge. Though maybe they don't discuss since the relationship is not statistically significant. But honestly that is quite interesting in itself. They should report the result of a power test for that, since it would be a very interesting null result.
NonLinear9 says:
Eh, it really irritates me when authors spend time discussing their non-significant results. To do so is to miss the point of doing that test in the first place. I'm not also sure why the null result is surprising — why do you find it so?
info says:
Many homosexual men were sexually abused as boys by Gay men.
filtering the results (mental illness, drugs, alcohol etc) by experience of molestation or otherwise might be informative as they tend to correlate (anecdotal).
Gwern, the chart on page 2 shows "percentage of same-sex sexual partners" is negatively correlated with number of children, as you'd expect. Though with women it breaks down and there's isn't a difference between being 50% and 100% lesbian.
The large trait chart I believe shows the relationship between gay genes and fertility, which is positive (and also linked to earlier fertility). Authors are not fully clear, in the supplement they say "Genetic correlation between same-sex sexual behavior and several traits of interest, separately for UK Biobank and 23andMe."
So if I am reading this right it supports the old theory that people with gay genes have more children when they don't turn out gay.
I understood the graphs fine. The problem is that if you believe in the inclusive fitness theory, these rgs do not seem to be nearly large enough. (Some of the rg CIs do not even exclude zero.) To very roughly sketch it out: you go from 1.6 to 0.3 children when you become homosexual, a loss of 1.3 children (a massive fitness reduction); this is somehow compensated by your average number of 1 sibling or 2 cousins, who are 50% and 25% related to you; to make up for your -1.3 children, your siblings need to have 2.6 children (in addition to their own baseline of 1.6) or your cousins have 5.2 children or some combination thereof etc (assuming of course none of them are homosexual, in which case the others have an even larger deficit to make up for). That's a lot of kids, for traits which have low heritabilities to begin with! An rg of ~0.05 doesn't seem like it is remotely enough to cut the mustard, and the inclusive fitness theory is wrong. However, since it's wrong, that still leaves puzzlingly positive correlations with fitness.
It could work out if only a small fraction of the people with a particular "gay gene" turn out gay. How common are the genes in question anyway?
"puzzlingly positive correlations with fitness"
maybe these genes they found are somehow connected to promiscuity more than homosexuality?
maybe these studies need to separate life-time homosexuals from people who have had occasional or possibly even a single experience (nb correlation with drugs and alcohol)?
gwern, i am not defending "homosexuality evolved because of gay uncles."
If the gay gene, on its own, caused homosexuality risk to go up 1%, but fertility if not homo by 2%, then it gets selected for.
My guess is male homosexuality is primarily caused by rare mutations, with schizophrenia being a closer match to what I've observed and read as a model for homosexuality than toxoplasmosis.
Very high MZ twin discordance..
"My guess is male homosexuality is primarily caused by rare mutations."
Some of it is influenced by rare mutations but the problem is male homosexuality is not very rare. Something other factors are at work to create the high percentage of homosexuals. Something not hereditary. Cochran has repeatedly made the argument that I can't disagree with that homosexuality can't be hereditary for the simple reason genes with tiny hits on fitness get weeded out, Inheriting the urge not to breed will obviously have a huge negative impact and would not spread though a population.
Schizophrenia hits about 1 in 80 men at some point in their life, exclusive homosexual orientation is about 1 in 40. Seems like the same ballpark. Both have a similar reduction in fertility of about 2/3 (at least in modern society).
Having the gay-promoting genes the study identified have a positive impact of fertility.
If a result isn't statistically significant – it isn't statistically significant.
Age at first birth, female, is statistically significant and lower. And the other ones are all in the direction of earlier/higher fertility, and some are close to SS. Ignoring results completely as a matter of principle that are just under SS is a fine policy to have, but it isn't one I follow.
if there are actually two things to be studied (promiscuity and homosexuality) but they are lumped together in the research then the result may be statistically significant in one group but not the other and so when averaged out the significance is lost?
Gord Marsden says:
Appears to be a very unhappy life , is number of children number of siblings ?
Yeah, does anyone know how an interested layperson can view the full text? A lot of the chart is unclear and it would be nice to read the definitions.
go to sci-hub.tw
Shakagreni Thomas says:
According to Plomin's book schizophrenia and major depressive disorder are essentially the same mental illness, expressed differently, and they as a group are heritable. They look about the same in the GWAS. I'm not sure if ADHD is in the same mental illness cluster or not.
Transexuals, on the other hand, tend towards (non-major) depression and anxiety disorders, another mental illness cluster at the GWAS level.
Andrew Oh-Willeke says:
I wouldn't consider that to be the majority or at least plurality opinion on the issue. Schizophrenia and bipolar have very heavy genetic overlap, and bipolar, of course, had a depression component. But, lots of major depression is a product of excessive anxiety and stress reaching overload and the body protecting itself from that by shutting down and collapsing instead of continuing to fight those stresses. ADHD like schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, has a very significant genetic component, but certainly doesn't overlap as strongly with the other two.
Of course, another complication is that DSM mental conditions are almost across the board syndromes, i.e. clusters of symptoms that present similarly, that with most conditions almost certainly don't have a single underlying cause and have significant sub-clusters. One of the strongest overlaps in the DSM in between mixed type ADHD and anti-social personality disorder (without the lack of empathy component associated with non-DSM conditions psychopathy and other "dark triad" conditions).
It is also appropriate to ponder the direction of cause and effect for some of these correlations. Being trans subjects you to all sorts of stresses in daily life and social interactions that can give rise to purely environmentally driven anxiety and depression, in the spirit of "just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that they aren't out to get you."
Greg — I understand why the "gay uncle" theory doesn't work: the effect would have to be so big that we would see it in action, and we don't. But I'm less clear on why sexually antagonistic selection can't work. Is it the same problem, or something else?
qtl says:
Is the chart showing the correlation of each trait with male/female homosexuality, or with the alleles correlated with male/female homosexuality? (I assume the latter since they show both bars even for sex-specific outcomes, but then I wish they would have shown the m/f breakdown for all the gene/phene correlations…)
The obvious model that would have "ever had homosexual contact" (rather than homosexuality strictly) mediated by the same gene for men and women would involve openness or low disgust threshold. That seems to fit with the fact that the openness/homosex correlation is higher and significant for female homosex — presumably if infection is a significant cause of male homosex, then any shared vector for male and female homosex would responsible for more of the variation in female behavior and thus have more signficant covariant traits.
(In fact one might even think that the less variation in male homosexual behavior openness-to-experience explains, the more it corroborates the stylized fact for gay-germ theories that orientation is changed by infection in childhood, since children don't have any choice in the matter. Any alternative theory where one homosexual contacta increases the likelihood of future repeats would expect high-openness to be strongly correlated with "trying it once" and therefore with full-blown homosexuality.)
With the alleles – genetic correlation..
i think you are right that "did it once" should have correlation to openness to experience in a way that "repeatedly voluntarily did it" would have to a much lesser degree and a narrow threshold in theory should provide a stronger signal in the data despite a smaller sample size.
One would still expect some "openness to experience" correlation, however, even then, because someone who is very not open to experience whose natural sexual orientation is not straight is likely to resist any same sex sexual contact and instead choose celibacy or to sublimate the urges by becoming an anti-gay pastor or politician or something like that instead. The absence of any trace of that in the men who have had sex with men category is one reason among several that I think that the "did it once" category in men includes a significant number of people who were raped in prison.
Another bit of circumstantial evidence is comes from STD data for men who have had sex with men and their partners. Black men who are incarcerated at much higher rate and thus subject to a much higher risk of prison rape who have had sex with men, and are much more likely to have spread that STD to a female partner than white men who have lower STD rates and are proportionately much less likely to have spread that STD to a female partner, suggesting that the having sex with men component for lots of black men who have done so is not driven nearly as strongly by sexual orientation.
I would like to find more papers on correlating SNPs and the Big 5 personality traits. Homosexual attraction seems to be correlated to significantly higher tolerance for disgust and significantly higher neuroticism. Openness as a category has issues, but makes sense as a proxy for risk taking. Is there a big 5 profile for homosexuality? Are these higher correlations will mental illness and bad behaviors a way to identify SNPs dor personality?
That won't help much. The SNP heritability for most of OCEAN is near zero. That's why you don't see any genetic correlations reported for Conscientiousness/Extraversion/Agreeableness, but only occasionally Openness (rg with IQ and education) and Neuroticism (rg with happiness, depression). There's no SNPs you can use. It's still an open question as to where the heritability of the rest of personality is hiding: epistasis? Rare variants?
The lack of significant correlation to openness to experience in gay men is particularly notable.
"asked whether the respondent had ever had a same-sex experience"
The biggest confound, as a result of this, may be incarcerated men who have been raped by fellow inmates.
Under the gay germ hypothesis I was expecting a raft of immune genes to be hit. Instead we get a lot of WNT signalling and olfactory — mostly neuronal stuff, which supports the reigning dogma (though of course it does nothing to overcome the other strong arguments against it).
Instead of modulating the immune system, maybe the genetic component modulates the response to the pathogen insult? Not the most elegant model, but . . .
the scent angle interests me – if you look at animals the female comes into season and (i assume) releases a scent and it's the scent that triggers the males so if you take the case of "gay rams" then most of the genetic arguments you could make for humans don't apply whereas one simple possibility might be either:
1) some rams give off female scent for some reason
2) some rams are triggered by male scent.
(intersex through twin chimerism?)
(populations with more twins have more homosexuals?)
LOADED says:
Any one here use Genomelink or various other websites to find genetic analyses of their behavioral profiles? I did. I'm predisposed to high risk-taking, loneliness, alcohol and cannabis consumption, and various other dangerous behavior.
I think all these things do lead to homosexual behavior because these behaviors in general because all of them would serve as rewards for conducting homosexual behavior:
loneliness-finding a partner
risk-taking-trying new things
alcohol and cannabis-doing new things under the influence
Anyways, don't think I'm gay but it's awful because I've lived quite a horrible 23 years of life because I've been put under so many stressors and put myself in dangerous situations. Some homosexual behavior is forced because it's innate in our social behaviors and has nothing to do with our preferences for a mate.
stephen Cooper says:
Dude, you seem to be an edgy guy.
Weird hot chicks love that, assuming you take good care of your personal hygiene and do not wear Gilligan Island level clothes. (if you have bad hygiene or dress like Gilligan — stop right now!)
Cheer up!
And no, sexual relations with others are not something we need, they are something that is what makes marriage and love between decent human beings one of the best things in life.
Cannabis is for unpoetic losers
alcohol is a bond between friends, but absent friendship, it is just a moral failing
Loneliness is not your fate, my friend. You amused me, and if you can amuse me enough to get me to spend a few of my precious moments to give you a compliment, you can easily
get access to quality pussy, by which I mean, you can find a woman to love you and to be the mother of your children.
When you have grandkids, remember that Stephen Cooper told you everything you needed to know to get quality pussy.
Don't forget that human evolved in small tribes with a social life completely different than our current society.
Sometimes I act at least twice my age, sometimes I act very immaturely. Finding the fine line between the two is what impresses people the most. That is what I am trying to embody.
Most people realize they are only going to impress a very limited number of fellow humans – for example, if you are an ordinary guy, you realize that your best bet in life is to impress one woman out of all the women in the world who may or may not think you are the best man they can find, but who is nevertheless a woman who will be happy to spend the few decades of her attractiveness with you – life is a short ride, for all of us, my friend —– and really there is nothing better in this world for most of us than not missing out on our chances for love.
and I am in a good mood tonight and I am gonna say this – you can believe me or not but there are generations of AIs who listen to everything I say, so I have an incentive which you cannot imagine to always tell the truth – and I am gonna say this —-
Prayer is powerful, God listens to the prayers of the humble (like me) and I am praying for you and for those who will be happy, in the future, at your successes in life.
Trust me. You amused me enough to get me to say
I am praying for you
you will do well in this world
if you remember that God loves us all.
I would like to see how related genes for height and weight are to homosexuality.
https://blog.timesunion.com/kristi/2010/03/03/shorter-men-more-likely-to-be-gay/24152/ https://research.similarminds.com/romantic-height-preferences-in-men-and-women/227
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3159904/American-taxpayers-spent-3-5m-skinny-nearly-75-cent-lesbians-obese.html
Pingback: What about the "Gay Gene"? | POLITICS & PROSPERITY
@soren, they tested height — look more closely at fig. 4. It's weakly negatively correlated.
logarithmichistory says:
Richard Wrangham has a brief discussion of homosexuality in his recent book "The Goodness Paradox". Mainly the book is an argument that human beings have gone through a process of self-domestication by killing off the most anti-social and violent group members over millennia. (Here's a discussion on my blog, https://logarithmichistory.wordpress.com/2019/07/19/the-goodness-paradox/ ) Wrangham argues that homosexuality in humans (and domesticated sheep) is a non-adaptive byproduct of selection for tameness. This is not supposed to be an explanation of why A is gay and B is not (there might not be a single cause for the various A's and B's; it might result from developmental noise), but of why sexual orientation is less canalized in our species and others recently domesticated. A possibility, he writes, "is that self-domestication has been operating too recently, up to historical times, for selection to operate strongly against incidental consequences" (p. 196).
Ive been saying that the agrarian revolution necessitated monogamy, which became a type of "cultural eugenics." Unintelligent and lazy men were ostracized from social circles and no women would risk their family's reputation procreating with such a brute, so his genes were eventually removed from the pool.
Modern welfare is having the opposite effect.
Dude, whatever you need to do get laid, amirite?
Boswald Bollocksworth says:
Self-domestication should have helped to prune "gay genes" or promote immunity to the pathogen. Sodomy and pederastery(correlated with homosexual behavior) would have been punished with reproduction-ending penalties in the medieval period. Iirc, Chinese and south Europeans have lower incidence of homosexuality than populations with less total history under sedentary agrarianism (Northern Europeans)
In his new book, Richard Wrangham proposes that human male homosexuality is a pedomorphic byproduct of self-domestication. He notes that only domesticated sheep show lasting homosexual behavior in nature.
Only domesticated sheep show homosexual behavior, then why there is no such trait among other domesticated animals like bovines, horses, pigs, chickens, etc.? And in what sense "domestication" of sheep is like "self-domestication" of humans? And what about the most domesticated animals that are the dogs?
I had the idea that homosexuals have LESS children than straight people, posing the question why such an evolutionary mortal trait survived. Now it appears that they have MORE children, making them fitter, so homosexuality is explained. I wish I was more intelligent and less confused.
They have fewer.
If so, it is a disorder, a disease. Cui bono? Who benefits from that compulsive itch? HIV benefits. Ergo, homosexuality may be caused by some tricky Lentivirus.
Dan Eggum says:
"The contribution of all common SNPs is larger, estimated to be between 8% and 25%. "
Does this mean that they can explain more of the variance in same sex-experience, than for educational attainment (PRS predicting 11% of variance)?
תמריץ says:
The confounding explanation is so simple. Straight man and women who are unstable (low on conscientiousness) are much more likely to have a gay experiences in their past. The question used in that research made it almost worthless.
That's a very reasonable caveat. I'm surprised BioBank didn't include a self-reported orientation question.
Sounds plausible, but is that an actual finding or are you just stereotyping?
Yep. Or have done time. The outcome variable is too poorly defined to be confident in these results. Need 23andme to ask "are you gay?"
Warren Notes says:
Given the high number of sexual partners, could homosexuality involve a type of hyper sexuality – at least in cognition / fantasy? This is not too far out if you consider the role of absent inhibition in coprolalia. There might also be a characteristic of absent inhibition that results in lower discrimination between desirable vs. non-desirable sexual partners that overlaps with "openness to experience." Finally, where does bisexuality fit in? It may be the more extreme version of lack of discrimination, rather than a "mid-point" between gay and straight as we so easily fall into thinking about it. Bisexuals are actually the "least" discriminating group, as their desirability is the least influenced by primary sexual characteristics, i.e., they are attracted to both males and females.
Is there a link between gays and thin-ness? I've often noticed these guys to be very thin.
It could be related to gays wanting to be more attractive to other gays so watching their diet or being more effiminate, therefore having lower muscle mass? I've also theorized it might be a consequence of gays having many infections because of high amount of sexual partners, leading to high calorie burn for an over-active immune system? I've never seen a paper explaining the thin-ness. If it's none of these things could it be a similar effect like drug use and depression?
(I'm not really trying to diss gays, btw. I just don't understand why gays are more often thin than straight men.)
Gays depend more on being attractive.
Dudeness says:
Gays don't have a woman doing the cooking for them so they eat less. Srsly.
helenahankart says:
They don't "look like noise" they look like "fast life history strategies". Stearns (1976)
They look like noise. Mental illness is not a 'fast life history strategy".
That depends.
"Mental illness" covers a large range of things from being dinged in the head (not adaptive unless you are running for congress) through frequency dependent selection (psychopathy problably) mismatches (addictions, almost certainly) extremes of a normal distribution (GAD, maybe feminine bran explanation of schizophrenia) and facultative adaptations to local conditions.
This isn't, by itself, controversial stuff.
Bowlby noted that attachment disturbance (we might call it "callibration") led to later risk taking, we know the mechanism by which GR genes de-methylate in response to maternal grooming, and the influence of this on later risk taking in mammals
Your mate Henry Harpending had it in mind (I know, because Jay asked him and talked to me about it at some length) when he and Jay Belsky hypothesised about the facultative effects of father absence on life history.
So–I wouldnt rule it out. Neither wolud Randy Nesse, e.g.
Good Reasons for Bad Feelings: Insights from the Frontier of Evolutionary Psychiatry
I think that the early-menarche with father absence thing has turned out not to be real.
I wish I could talk to Henry about this… but the more I think about it, the patterns that some have called " fast life histories" look to me have been a recipe for failure, except in the most resource-rich societies ( which are rare). As such, more likely a consequence of mutational load than any kind of strategy.
I have always been interested in the idea of alternate evolutionary strategies, but in humans, I can't at this point see evidence for any, other than men and women.
With a little imagination, one can clearly see that "this point" is the past, humanity has passed the point of men and women based reproduction. Who but you knows what can be done in a lab with genetic engineering. We are living the last days of "natural" human evolution, science fiction creatures are no more fiction. We see no evidence of the dawning of this new era because regulations and conventions designed to stop the advance of reproductive science, and the horror of the media in face of the new. I consider the strange creatures living in computer games and Marvel Universe as evidence that something is coming.
"early-menarche with father absence"
if it's true i'd expect it to be genetic passed on to the daughter by the mother who got pregnant by the sort of dude who targets girls who are sexually active when they're still young and gullible i.e. "he told me he loved me!" i.e. the sort of dude who doesn't stick around.
these dudes are definitely a type but they mostly exist on the fringes so the average person doesn't come into contact (unless their job involves the fringes).
"the patterns that some have called " fast life histories" look to me have been a recipe for failure, except in the most resource-rich societies ( which are rare)"
i think this is mostly true and the sort of dudes i'd call "slack" used to only survive on the scraps and fringes often involving lots of travel (musicians, soldiers, sailors, criminals, carnies etc) but since off-shoring that's reversed in the rust-belt towns – the once 95%+ "steady" dudes give up trying and slowly drink themselves to death while the small minority of "slack" dudes suddenly got a massive reproductive boost (cos welfare pays for their kids).
another possible exception to "resource-rich society" might be places like the Congo where war bands go back and forth raping the villagers along their path ( i saw a documentary once where village women were explaining how all their kids were the product of various rapes from various militias)
so i'd say the common element is female-only provisioning – where kids need a male provider to survive then "slack" genes get bred out but where a male provider isn't necessary then "fast life history" becomes adaptive for the males.
seems to me (assuming we started in the jungle where females fed their kids on their own) then "fast life history" for the males would originally have been the norm and it's been slowly bred out over time so the question becomes if a trait is in balanced selection does it ever get to 100% vs 0% or will there always be a surviving pool which, if the environment changes, can expand rapidly?
Mostly, over the past few thousand years, a pattern that looked like the usual definition of a "fast life history" would leave you with no descendants. Thinking about it, one reason that the historical nonpaternity rate looks so low must be, partly, because bastards died like flies.
"Over the past few thousand," yes. The past 150 years, no.
How many descendants of Carrie Buck's grandmother (born circa 1860) are in the USA right now compared to Justice Holmes (b. 1841)?
The bastards and their mothers.
"Yet the degree of shared genetic influence is also interesting – I don't think it would be predicted by most strategy models."
testing on the basis of "any" same-sex experience (as opposed to restricting it to people with a long-term orientation) might tell you more about promiscuity than homosexuality.
so it may not be a genetic strategy at all but if it is (or if part of it is) a strategy then maybe it's more a side-effect of a promiscuity strategy (r-K) than a homosexuality strategy per se.
"There are at least as many bisexual men as gay men, as polls of sexuality in the youngest generation (Generation Z? Where are we now? sorry…) are confirming."
the Gen Z stuff is accurate but not true i.e. it's a side-effect of the "progressive stack" where white middle class kids are at the bottom of the stack so pretending to be "genderfluid" "genderqueer" bisexual etc is their way of clawing their way up the stack – it's basically the modern equivalent of pretending to be native American.
(nb i wouldn't be surprised if the numbers for one-time same-sex experience didn't go up as a result but it's not because they're actually homosexual)
"where white middle class kids are at the bottom of the stack so pretending to be "genderfluid" "genderqueer" bisexual etc is their way of clawing their way up"
The increase in reported non-hetero identification is across all races, but whites the least.
It also isn't true IRL that whites are "at the bottom." College humanities departments are not the whole of America.
fair enough – most of the ones i've come across were white and from college humanities departments so my anecdata may be skewed by that – either way at least part of this phenomenon is due to cultural fashion.
apologies for spamming but one last thought…
if promiscuity is part of this puzzle (whether the causes are genetic or environmental) then it might tie into the germ/virus theory as people who were promiscuous (or whose parents were) might be more likely to pick up the virus?
example of what i mean
1) virus/bug exists which if the mother is infected increases likelihood of kid becoming homosexual
2) married dude has four kids over ten years with wife
3) during same period dude visits four prostitutes a year with say 5% chance of picking up bug and passing it on to wife each visit
leading to correlation of homosexuality with youngest sibling.
Efim Hawkins says:
Dr. Cochran,
Ed Dutton (the "Jolly Heretic") and his colleague recently had a brief discussion about "Gay Germ Theory":
Would love to read your thoughts about their comments, if you'd care to write a response some time.
Woodley makes three points. They are all false
A. That MZ concordance for homosexuality is much higher than I said. That's untrue. For example, in this Swedish study from 2010 [Genetic and Environmental Effects on Same-sex Sexual Behavior: A Population Study of Twins in Sweden], they found 7 concordant pairs and 64 discordant pairs in MZ twins.
B. He talks about what I've said about the evolution of homophobia. I haven't said anything about it.
C. He talks about selection for such things in other primates – but preferential homosexuality does not exist at any significant level among other primates. In fact, the only known example is in sheep.
Woodley is consistent.
7/71 is 9.8% and appears to be on the extreme low side. The top results on the topic from a web search:
"Bailey and Pillard found that 52% of the MZ co-twins of male homosexual twins were
also homosexual or bisexual"
"Bailey et al found that 48% of MZ co-twins of female homosexual twins were also
"More recently, Kendler et al conducted a study that used a random sample of
approximately 3,000 people. The researchers found a concordance rate of 32% for nonheterosexual orientation in [male] MZ twins"
Whitham 1993: "Thirty-eight pairs of monozygotic twins (34 male pairs and 4 female pairs) were found to have a concordance rate of 65.8% for homosexual orientation."
Bailey's 2000 study from an Australian sample found 37.5% and 30.1% concordance for MZ male and female twins and 11.1 and 11.5% for DZ twins.
The Swedish study was of "at least one same sex experience" and had 5% say yes to this, while Bailey's Australian study was of concordance of "not exclusively heterosexual orientation" and 8.1% of the male population. I think Bailey's was more informative since the Swedish study considered individuals with homosexual attraction but no homosexual experience as straight, while putting individuals with a single random homosexual experience but who'd report zero homosexual attraction as homosexual.
Bailey also found even stronger concordance for gender nonconformity.
About prior studies, they say:
our MZ concordances were 20% and 24%, respectively, for the strict [excluding Kinsey 1s] criterion that is most similar to those used in prior studies. These rates are significantly lower than the respective rates for the two largest prior twin studies of sexual orientation: for men, 52% ( ), [chi] (1, = 550) = 8.2, < .01, and for women, 48% ( ), [chi] (1, = 1,115) = 4.3, < .05. This suggests that concordances from prior studies were inflated because of concordance-dependent ascertainment bias. In those studies, twins deciding whether to participate in a study clearly related to homosexuality probably considered the sexual orientation of their co-twins before agreeing to participate. In contrast, both the more general focus of our study (i.e., on sexuality in general) and its anonymous response format made such considerations less likely.
When I talk about this, I ask Bailey first.
Disingenuous of you not to mention fecundity as a correlate.
Wasn't statistically significant.
Pingback: The Gay Debate | The Z Blog
Jacob Blaustein says:
"As far as I can see, they look like noise, rather than any kind of genetic strategy. Mostly, they accord with what we already knew about male and female homosexuals: both are significantly more likely to have psychiatric disorders, far more likely to use drugs. The mental-illness association maybe looks stronger in lesbians. The moderately-shared genetic architecture seems compatible with a noise model."
Could be epigenetic: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/09/190930161920.htm
It is not as easy to set a new record for stupidity as some people seem to think.
Leave a Reply to Hypoborean Cancel reply


Prefer inline scripts? A full (.umd.js) and minified (.min.js) script is available for every version through Unpkg. You can access the package's exports through window.CuriRouteActive.
The @curi/route-active package determines whether a route is "active" by comparing it to the current response. This can be restricted to complete matches or allow partial matches so that locations that represent an ancestor of the current location are also considered "active".
A function to create the active route interaction. When you create your router, the result is passed to the router using the `route` option, which will add an active() function to the router's route interactions.
The interaction returns a boolean: true when a route is "active" (it matches the response's location) and false when it does not.
The name of the route to check if it is active.
The response to check the route against.
An optional argument with additional properties can be passed as the third argument.
components: location => location.hash === "comments"
Any route params for the route that is being checked.
When true, ancestor routes can be considered active. (default false).
A function that receives a location object and returns a boolean. The default active check only compares the pathname component of the location. This can be useful for checking the other components (hash and query).
This function will only be called when the provided name and params match.


Kew Botanical Fig & Rose Candle has a pure and complex aroma and is inspired by the Royal Botanical Gardens of Kew. Beautifully presented in a gift box and poured in Great Britain.
Highly perfumed scented room fragrance.


Pull up a chair and immerse yourself in the look and feel of a bricks and mortar casino by playing our live link game, Live Common Draw Blackjack. Unlike other live blackjack games, there's no need to wait for a seat as all players share cards. You just have to decide whether you will hit, stand, split, or double! Play for real money with bets ranging from €5 to €500.
Should you decide the stand, other players can still hit, meaning there are no restrictions with using the card stream. The live chat feature enables you to communicate with the dealer, or other players, for a more enhanced experience. Benefit from the Blackjack Billboard at the top of the screen showing statistics to help you, such as: the dealer's last 10 and 100 hands, the last hand for all players, and the percentage of actions for the hand by other players.


text:
Christian Seely's Blog
Tag Archives: Vintage Port
TIME AND WINE. An extraordinary tasting of Vintage Port organised by Don Schliff at the Bel Air Hotel Los Angeles.
February 14, 2020 Christian Seely	1 Comment
I have known Don Schliff for over 25 years, since he came to visit Quinta do Noval in 1994. He had a reputation even then as one of the great collectors of Vintage Port, and one of the most knowledgeable Port tasters. I thought I would put him to the test, and so decanted a bottle of the Quinta do Noval Nacional 1962. This is an extremely rare wine, and very little known. The 1963 is justly famed as one of the great wines of the world, but although the 1962 Vintage was not generally declared, the Quinta do Noval vineyard made some lovely wines that year, and in particular the 1962 Nacional, which is a wonderful wine, an austere but very pure fine and complex expression of the Nacional. This, I thought, would flummox him, and indeed anyone. However great it is, it is very rarely talked about, and very rarely tasted. We began to drink the wine at the end of lunch and I asked him what he thought it might be. In his deceptively laid back and relaxed way, he said, "Well, I don't know. It kind of reminds me of the Nacional 1962!"
I knew from that moment that I was in the presence of someone who knew Vintage Port, and nothing since then has contradicted this judgement. Don has over the years organised some astonishing tastings in Los Angeles for small groups of sophisticated – some fanatical – connoisseurs and lovers of old Vintage Ports from his cellars in Los Angeles, and from time to time has asked me to participate.
On Sunday February 2, 2020, he invited me to be present at what was surely an historic and certainly unrepeatable tasting of fine old Vintage Ports, mostly from his personal collection.
Here is the list of wines that was put before us:
Shipper Unknown 1834
Cossart Gordon Solera 1844 Bual Madeira
Warre's 1851
Ferreira 1858
Sandeman 1868
Cockburn's 1912
Niepoort 1927
Quinta do Noval 1931
Taylor Fladgate 1945
Mackenzie 1955
Fonseca 1963
Graham 1970
Quinta do Noval Nacional 2000
Niepoort Garrafeira 1987
Rather than try to give tasting notes on each wine, I prefer to talk about the wines that particularly stood out for me. The first two in particular, the 1834 and the 1844, from that well known producer whose wines I have so often come across, "Unknown Shipper" (By this age, all trace of labels has vanished, if there ever were any, and it is rare that the cork can give very much information apart from the year of production, which is also sometimes still printed in a wax seal over the cork.) Both were remarkable, still alive, and incredibly, fresh and enjoyable. The 1844 was actually one of the stars of the whole tasting. These were very old wines. The 1834, made just 19 years after the battle of Waterloo, still had fruit, from grapes grown so long ago, in an unrecognisable world. The Duke of Wellington himself, who liked to drink several bottles of Port each day, may well have drunk this wine, which would have been 18 years old when he died in 1852. How extraordinary it is that a bottle of wine can survive so long, and form a link for us with events and people from so long ago.
This is one of the characteristics of Vintage Port. It can be an astonishingly long lived wine. It is not immortal. Even the very best Port wines have a limited life, reach their apogee, and then decline, sometimes over a long plateau of decades, and will finally reach the stage where they have nothing more to give. But they can live longer than us, and this enables us to have a relationship with them that can last for generations.
In the opening lines of his Ode on a Grecian Urn, Keats addresses the Urn itself
Thou still unravish'd bride of quietness,
Thou foster-child of silence and slow time
But this would equally be an appropriate address to a bottle of ancient Vintage Port, ageing quietly and serenely in the cellar of a great collector like Don Schliff.
Time plays a vital role in the development of all wines. Even simple white wines that might be ready to drink in the year following harvest require at least a few months after the harvest to make them ready to drink. Great complex wines, both red and white, may require many years ageing, in barrel, in bottle, at the winery, in the cellar of the wine drinker, in order to reveal all that they have to offer.
But time is the friend of Vintage Port in particular. You can of course drink some Vintage Ports when they are very young. One of the final wines we tasted at Don's tasting was the 2017 Quinta do Noval Nacional, which I believe to be one of the great Nacionals the Quinta has ever produced. I am quite certain that this wine will be wonderful to drink in a century, and indeed I very much hope that a group of Port lovers like the one that was united by Don at the Bel Air on Sunday will taste this wine in 2120. But it is also a hugely sybaritic pleasure to drink this wine in its infancy today. This is no crime: just a different way of enjoying it. But time will undoubtedly allow the wine to reveal layers of aroma and complexities of flavour that are only present in a concentrated, impressive, but as yet unrevealed form today.
Some of the wines in this tasting I had drunk before, some of them decades ago with people who are still alive today, some with people who no longer are. Some of the wines in this tasting I hope to drink in years to come, perhaps with my sons, who are still mostly too young to enjoy them today, but with whom it will be a pleasure to observe their discovery of what great wine can be. And some of the wines I shall share with them, they will be able perhaps one day to share with their children, when I may no longer be around. These wines traverse generations, and form a link at the present moment at which we drink them both with the past and with the people with whom we may have shared them before, and with the future, and with moments to come when we will enjoy them again, or when others will. Vintage Port is a wine that permits this kind of experience.
So an event such as the tasting that Don organised on Sunday 2nd February in LA goes way beyond the fact of being just a wine tasting; it is an experience of wines in time, wines which in some cases have travelled through many decades to be with us on that day, and which in some cases have very many decades before them, during which we may get the chance to revisit them again, perhaps to share them with some of the people there on Sunday, perhaps with other people; and during which they will also be discovered by people who are perhaps not even yet born.
To return to the wines, among the many great experiences we had that day, the stand outs for me were the following:
Cockburn's 1912, amazingly youthful still, rich, ripe, fresh and long, with still some fruit and tannin;
Niepoort 1927, surely one of the great 1927s, still with a relatively youthful deep profound colour, complex rich, youthful and quite delicious. I had this wine for the first time with Dirk Niepoort in 1994 at his house, and it has remained on a plateau of excellence ever since, evolving slowly of course, but really not appearing to be very much older than that first great experience.
Quinta do Noval 1931. From the excellent bottling of Fearon Block Bridges and Routh, and an outstanding example of this great wine. The legendary 1931 greatly enhanced Noval's reputation in the twentieth century. The major shippers did not declare the 1931, since the great depression had begun and they all had very large stocks of the great 1927 Vintage on their hands. But Noval has a history of eccentricity, and decided to declare the Vintage anyway. It was only as the years passed that it was realised how great the 1931 Vintage was, and the Quinta do Noval was the wine that showed this. As a result it has been a legendary wine for Port lovers ever since, much sought after, and now becoming extremely rare. I have been able to taste the 1931 a few times, and it still amazes by its youth and vigour. But not only is it still fresh, it has the typical Noval characteristics of elegance, and manages to be fine and delicate as well as long and powerful. It is recognisably typical of the Noval style, as I have come to know it in the Vintage Ports we have been making over the past 26 years, and this typicity is remarkable in a wine that is now nearly ninety years old.
The Taylor 1945 was also outstanding, and to taste this wine alongside the Noval 31 was to experience the radical difference in style between the two great houses, and indeed the two great Vintages. While the Noval was all finesse, the Taylor was monumental, rich powerful structured dense and profound, just a great wine.
Towards the end of this tasting of great old wines, there were two pairs of relatively young Noval wines, which I was very happy to see in such company.
Firstly, we tasted the 2000 Vintage Ports from both Quinta do Noval and from the Quinta do Noval Nacional. Since we first made these wines, they have been among my favourite Novals, a preference perhaps increased by the fact that 2000 has in my view not yet been recognised for the great vintage that I believe it to be. Both these wines were always very backward in their youth, closed tight and tannic, and extremely reserved. But I have always believed them to be among the great wines that the Quinta has produced, and over the past few years they have begun to open up a little and begin to reveal what they have to show. The Quinta do Noval Vintage Port comes of course from various parcels over the whole of Noval's 145 hectare estate, representing a strict selection of the very best wines from the property that rarely exceeds 10% of the total production. The Nacional on the other hand always comes only from the tiny 4 acre parcel of ungrafted vines at the heart of the Quinta, which always produces a wine that is exceptional and quite different from the wines from the rest of the property. The 2000 wines are no exception to this, though I have always felt that the 2000 Quinta do Noval is one of the Vintage Ports from the Quinta that rivals most closely in excellence the Nacional from the same year, albeit with a different personality. Today was no exception to this: the 2000 Quinta do Noval Vintage was true to itself, still a little reserved, but very complex, spicy and fresh, with very big powerful reserved tannins, very long, very persistent. Above all very harmonious and balanced. The Nacional was all of those things, but with a few degrees more of intensity, very complete, very fine and very long. I remain convinced that this was a very great Vintage at Noval!
We then compared two of the great recent Nacionals, the 2011, and the 2017. I thought that it was important to show these two wines at this extraordinary tasting, alongside so many great old wines from the distant past, as a reminder that great and wonderful wines are still being made in the Douro! I believe in fact that the 2011 and 2017 Nacional wines are among the greatest Nacionals that the Quinta has ever made. They are of course still babies at the moment, but already the very different styles of the two vintages are evident. 2017 was a very hot dry year, with alarming heat spikes during the summer, and drought conditions during the growing period, with rainfall down to about half the normal (low) levels we are used to in the Douro. I remember worrying before the harvest that such extreme conditions were unlikely to produce balanced wines. But I need not have worried. The result of this year of very extreme weather conditions is unquestionably one of the greatest Nacionals ever, exuberantly and extravagantly ripe, exotic, dense powerful and expressive, even at this stage. The 2011 on the other hand was the product of a much more balanced and relatively temperate year, and its style reflects this. It has always been marked by a wonderfully complete balance and harmony, intense, pure, fine fresh and long, and is also clearly one of the great historic Nacionals . I am sure that Vintage Port lovers will be comparing these two great wines for many decades to come, and should a group of wine lovers meet as we did for a tasting of old Vintage Ports in a century's time and taste these two, I am quite sure that they will still have wonderful things to reveal.
In conclusion, this tasting, hosted by the great wine collector Don Schliff was an extraordinary event. I should mention that the various flights of Port were accompanied by outstanding food prepared by Wolfgang Puck. It was a wonderful afternoon of celebration, certainly unforgettable, certainly unrepeatable.
christian seelyDon SchliffPortQuinta do NovalVintage PortWine Tasting
Quinta do Noval Nacional Vintage Port 2001 and Quinta do Noval Vintage Port 2014
October 5, 2016 Christian Seely	Leave a comment
I was in the Douro valley last week, where the harvest is under way. After a very wet start to the year, we then had one of the hottest and dryest summers ever, so it has been a year of contrasts. Harvest continues in excellent conditions, and we will know more about the final quality of the wines in a few weeks time, but it looks good so far.
Here is a picture of early morning harvest at Quinta do Noval last week, cagettes in the foreground, taken from the promontory at the end of the Roncão valley, which is the midpoint of my morning run, with the Douro and some of Quinta da Romaneira in the background. This is one of my favourite places in the world. The vines here are Touriga Nacional, which we planted in 2000 and which are already giving wines of outstanding quality.
But Quinta do Noval was a good place to be anyway last week as we launched two great Ports on the same day: our Quinta do Noval Vintage Port 2014 and our Quinta do Noval Nacional Vintage Port 2001.
Click on the links above to read what I wrote about these wines on the Quinta do Noval website.
20012014DouroNacionalQuinta do Noval Nacional VintageQuinta do Noval VintageVintage Port
Happy Birthday Quinta do Noval
March 30, 2016 Christian Seely	5 Comments
I have been giving a series of tastings and events recently to celebrate the 300th anniversary of Quinta do Noval's existence as a vineyard.
In fact, there has certainly been a vineyard on the site for longer than that, possibly much longer. 1715 is the first record of the existence of the vineyard, as it was part of the inheritance of the young Francisco Álvares Taveira, future abbot of Gouvães, who had to show documentary proof of his wealth before becoming the Abbot, (no nonsense about promotion on pure merit in those days) hence the records. But as it was already a vineyard in 1715, clearly it had been a vineyard for a while before that. So we are celebrating that Quinta do Noval is at least three hundred years old, but it is certainly older.
Going even further back, at the crown of the hill of the Noval estate, there was a Roman settlement, where among the many Roman artefacts discovered during the archeological dig in the early 20th century was an area that looked very much like a wine press. If so, then wine has been made at this site for over 2,000 years, and I like to believe it, though proof positive is lacking.
But it is the relatively recent history that concerns us more, the time during which wines have been made that we can taste today, living memories of the former life of the vineyard at Noval. I personally have an intimate knowledge of the past 23 years at Quinta do Noval, the time that I have been responsible for looking after it having taken over as Managing Director in 1993.
Before that I mainly know the Quinta's history through its wines. Among my favourites are of course the extraordinary 1931, both Vintage Nacional and Quinta do Noval; the harmonious and elegant 1955 Quinta do Noval, which was one of my primary inspirations; along with the beautiful delicate and fine 1966, when I started working on the vineyard and the wines in the early nineties. From the Sixties also the 1963 Vintage Nacional is and always has been in a category of its own, rated perfect and great by many distinguished tasters from the time of its birth to the present day. The Seventies and Eighties were a difficult time for Port and for Noval, but I have a soft spot for the very delicate finesse of the Vintage Nacional 1975.
And then glorious days returned with the wonderful 1994 Vintage Nacional, my first at the Quinta, and what luck to have arrived just before such a wine. James Suckling's 100 points for this wine when he was writing for the Wine Spectator were a shot in the arm for Noval, a clear signal to the world that this great vineyard was capable as it always had been of producing greatness. Since then we have had a series of exceptional years: the 1997, an important year for us when Robert Parker awarded 100 points to both the Quinta do Noval and the Vintage Nacional, a right and left, in shooting parlance, that added momentum to the renaissance of Quinta do Noval's reputation. The generally declared years of 2000, 2003 and 2007 followed. The Vintage Nacional as always followed its own rhythm, not producing wine to its normal level in 2007, so not declared, but making exceptional wines in the lesser known years of 2001 and 2004.
And then 2011. A phenomenon for Port wine in general, certainly one of the great years in history, with beautiful wines from Quinta do Noval and from the Nacional parcel. The 2011 Vintage Nacional has already acquired a justified cult status, garnering 100 points or the equivalent from several different distinguished wine journalists. I believe that this one is a worthy successor to the legendary 1963 and 1931, scion of a noble breed, both genetic inheritor of the greatness of its ancestors, but also with all the strength and vigour of youth, ready to affront the century to come of long life that certainly lies before it.
We declared both 2012 and 2013 Vintage Ports at Quinta do Noval, very small quantities in both cases, but irresistibly delicious wines. Historically Noval has been ready to make an eccentric declaration (the 1931 was one such), and so inspired both by history and the wines themselves we did not hesitate to make these small declarations, both of which are worthy members of any vertical line up of historic Quinta do Noval Vintages.
And during this time of reconnection with the illustrious past through the production of great modern Vintage Ports, this historic vineyard of Noval has been reinventing itself as a producer of great unfortified red wines. We launched our first Quinta do Noval Douro DOC red wine with the 2004 vintage, and our 2012, placed first in a recent extensive tasting of Douro red wines by the Revista de Vinhos, has just sold out, so we move to the delicious 2013, with the 2014 and 2015 vintages, among the best ever, waiting in the wings.
In a way, these new Douro red (and white) wines are also a reconnection with the history of the property and of the Douro. Fortification of Douro wines only became general in the first half of the 19th Century. The celebrated Baron James Forrester, who drowned in the river in 1861, was a strong advocate for the unfortified wines of the Douro, an indication that their production as quality wines was general at the time and persisted at least during his lifetime. There is no question that the development of Port Wine as a fortified wine led to the evolution of one of the great wines of the world, for which the Douro is chiefly known today, and no one could love great Port wines more than I. However, something was surely lost in the gradual eclipse of non fortified wine making during the 19th century. We will never know how those wines might have developed had they been the principal focus of Douro wine production.
What we know now however, as we catch up for lost time, is that the Douro is capable of producing world class unfiltered red – and white – wines. The Valley today has a new dynamic, as dozens of independent producers, some small, some less so, contribute every year to this thrilling development by producing excellent wines from all corners of the demarcated area. I find this development wholly positive for the Douro and its reputation, but also very good news for wine drinkers all over the world, and I am delighted that Quinta do Noval has been able to participate in this movement since 2004.
The history of a great vineyard, like that of a great region, is the product of the labours of generations of people who went before us and devoted themselves to their land and their wines. The further back the history, the greater the accumulation of inherited knowledge and tradition, and this is what we build upon. But at the same time we are constructing the future for those who will follow us in these vineyards. So while I wish Quinta do Noval a very Happy Birthday on the occasion of its proven 300 years, I also wish very many Happy Returns to this magical vineyard and to the region of which it is at the heart. Great things have happened here in the past, great things are happening now, and I am confident that even greater are to come in the future.
DouroNacionalVintage Port
Quinta do Noval Vintage Port 2013
May 22, 2015 Christian Seely	1 Comment
We have just declared a Quinta do Noval Vintage Port from 2013. We have done this kind of thing before, an "eccentric declaration" but actually I think it is the first time we have ever declared three Vintages in a row under the Quinta do Noval name. But I had no doubt in the tasting room that it was the right thing to do.
With António Agrellos in January this year tasting the 2013 Vintage
2013 could have been a much better year generally than it was: everything was looking great as the harvest began, and then it started to rain, which generally meant that we just missed making great wines from most of the vineyard, as once the rains starts, you are under such pressure from potential rot, that you just have to haul it all in as fast as possible, which means that in many cases you are not picking at optimal ripeness, which would have been later for many parcels, there can be an effect of dilution from the rain etc.. Having said all that, the overall quality was very good, just not as outstanding as it might have been.
With the exception of a few lots of wine we made in the first ten days of the harvest before the rains started.
Not all of these were actually of Vintage potential, but some of them most definitely were at Quinta do Noval. The wine we blended from the best of them shows what the 2013 Vintage might have been generally had the rain not come. The quantity of wine of the right quality was tiny – only 1,200 cases, or less than 3% of our production, but it is an authentic Quinta do Noval Vintage Port, a rare wine, being one of a small number of limited production quality wines from the 2013 harvest in the Douro, and I am very happy to be able to declare it. I am very confident it will be able to hold its head high in a vertical tasting in a few years' time along with the other Quinta do Noval declarations from the past 20 years or so.
2013Antonio Agrelloschristian seelyDouroPortPortugalQuinta do NovalVintage PortVintage Port 2013
An Exceptional Vintage Port Tasting
February 16, 2015 Christian Seely	2 Comments
Don Schliff's Exceptional Tasting
I was in Los Angeles recently for an unforgettable tasting organised by Don Schliff of the Wine Warehouse. Don has an extraordinary personal collection of Vintage Port, and opened for a group of enthusiasts a range of remarkable bottles from his cellar, which we tasted in the convivial surroundings of the Hotel Bel Air in Beverly Hills.
I first met Don when I had just started at Quinta do Noval over twenty years ago. He came to visit the property and we had lunch. I knew little about the trade at that time, but was aware that Mr Schliff was a distinguished member of it. So I decided to open one of the more obscure, but one of my favourites, of the old Nacionals, the 1962. I thought to myself: he has made the effort to come here, and so we will open something he will never have had the chance to taste before.
As the decanter went round at the end of lunch I asked Don what he thought of the wine. In a very laid back way he answered "It kind of reminds me of the Nacional 1962!" I realised that I was in the presence of someone who knew more about Port than most people do. As time has gone by I have come to respect even more his encyclopaedic knowledge and fine judgement of great Vintage Ports.
So when Don invited me over for this tasting, it was irresistible. An extensive range of Vintage Ports from 1963; and then a vertical of Quinta do Noval Nacionals: 1963; 1958; 1962; 1960, and finally a 1927 from Dow and a bottle of the 1931 Quinta do Noval Vintage, the legendary declaration that made Noval's reputation.
While we tasted the 1963s, we were served an outstanding lunch prepared by Wolfgang Puck, who proved that Vintage Port is not just a wine to be drunk in isolation (though that works very well) but also has wonderful gastronomic possibilities when you are in the hands of a master chef.
The 1963s were generally showing very well indeed, the stars of the show being for me Fonseca, Taylor's and Dow, which was actually my number one wine. Quinta do Noval Vintage 1963 was lovely but the three I mention had more concentration and power. The 1963 Nacional was in another series, and I have to say in another category, as always, astonishingly youthful reserved complex and powerful. And then we tried the other Nacionals, all beautiful and in great condition. The 1960 was particularly lovely, fine delicate and aromatic. And then we finished with the great 1927 from Dow and the astonishing 1931 Quinta do Noval Vintage. I have tasted this wine a few times over the past twenty years, and each time it amazes by its youth, and seems not to grow one whit older. There must be very few bottles left in the world by now, but to anyone who has one, there is no hurry to drink up: this is a wine with at least a couple of decades left in it.
Well, this tasting was one of the great experiences of my life, proof if any proof were needed that Vintage Port is one the greatest wines produced on the planet, capable as we know of providing great pleasure when fairly young (I am drinking some of my 2000 and 2003 Novals right now and they are wonderful), but also capable of revealing extraordinary complexity, finesse and aromatic intensity as they age. Thank you Don for a memorable experience.
Photo courtesy of Roy Hersh, whom I was delighted to see at this tasting. Roy was writing up the tasting for The SOMM Journal, and his report will later appear in For The Love of Port.
christian seelyDon SchliffPortQuinta do NovalThe Wine WarehouseUSAVintage PortWine Tasting
Château Petit-Village
Château Pibran
Château Pichon Baron
Château Suduiraut
Coates and Seely
Disznókő
Domaine de l'Arlot
FAQ – Questions / Answers
Quinta da Romaneira
Bringing the Hangács vineyard back to life at Disznókő
The harvest is under way at Pichon Baron
A successful Marathon for Pichon Baron
FAQ - Questions / Answers
Disznoko
Domaine de l'Arlot
For The Love of Port
Jeff Leve The Wine Cellar Insider
Jim's Loire
Richard Mayson
Stephen Tanzer's Winophilia
The Institute of Masters of Wine
wineanorak.com – Jamie Goode's online wine magazine

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
/**
 * SerialDeviceFactory.c
 * (c) 2004 - 2006 SkyeTek, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
 *
 * Implementation of the SerialDeviceFactory.
 */
#include "../SkyeTekAPI.h"
#include "Device.h"
#include "DeviceFactory.h"
#include "SerialDevice.h"
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <malloc.h>

#ifndef WIN32
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#ifdef __sun
#include <sys/mkdev.h>
#endif
#include <fcntl.h>
#endif

#if defined(WIN32)
SKYETEK_STATUS
SerialDeviceFactory_CreateDevice(
  TCHAR              *address,
  LPSKYETEK_DEVICE  *lpDevice
  )
{
	HANDLE h;

	if( lpDevice == NULL )
		return SKYETEK_INVALID_PARAMETER;

	if(_tcsstr(address, _T("COM")) == NULL)
		return SKYETEK_INVALID_PARAMETER;

	h = CreateFile(address, GENERIC_READ | GENERIC_WRITE, 0, NULL, OPEN_EXISTING, 0, NULL);
	if( h == INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE )
		return SKYETEK_FAILURE;
	CloseHandle(h);
	*lpDevice = (LPSKYETEK_DEVICE)malloc(sizeof(SKYETEK_DEVICE));
	memset((*lpDevice),0,sizeof(SKYETEK_DEVICE));

  _tcscpy((*lpDevice)->friendly,address);
  _tcscpy((*lpDevice)->address,address);
  _tcscpy((*lpDevice)->type,SKYETEK_SERIAL_DEVICE_TYPE);

	SerialDevice_InitDevice(*lpDevice);
  return SKYETEK_SUCCESS;
}

unsigned int
SerialDeviceFactory_DiscoverDevices(
  LPSKYETEK_DEVICE  **lpDevices
  )
{
  unsigned int ix, deviceCount = 0;
	TCHAR portName[12];

  if((lpDevices == NULL) || (*lpDevices != NULL))
    return 0;

	/* Allocate for 10 but might not use all */
  *lpDevices = (LPSKYETEK_DEVICE*)malloc(10 * sizeof(LPSKYETEK_DEVICE));
	memset(*lpDevices,0,(10*sizeof(LPSKYETEK_DEVICE)));

	/* Scan for 10 serial ports */
	memset(portName,0,sizeof(TCHAR)*12);
  for(ix = 1; ix < 10; ix++)
  {
	#ifdef WINCE
	  _stprintf(portName, _T("COM%d:"),ix);
	#else
	  _stprintf(portName,  _T("COM%d"), ix);
	#endif
		if( SerialDeviceFactory_CreateDevice(portName, &(*lpDevices)[deviceCount]) != SKYETEK_SUCCESS )
			continue;
    deviceCount++;
  }

  return deviceCount;
}

#else

SKYETEK_STATUS
SerialDeviceFactory_CreateDevice(
  char              *address,
  LPSKYETEK_DEVICE  *lpDevice
  )
{
	struct stat deviceStat;
	unsigned int major;
	int fd;

	if(stat(address, &deviceStat) == -1)
		return SKYETEK_INVALID_PARAMETER;

	major = major(deviceStat.st_rdev);

	switch(major)
	{
#ifdef LINUX
		/* 4 is standard linux serial
		 * 89 is I2C
		 * 153 is S3C2410 SPI
		 * 204 is S3C2410 serial
		 * 188 is USB to serial
		 */
		case 4:
		case 89:
		case 153:
		case 188:
		case 204:
#elif defined(__sun)
    /* 20 is serial */
    case 20:
#else
#error Need to define platform specific major numbers
#endif
			if((fd = open(address, O_NOCTTY | O_RDWR)) == -1)
				return SKYETEK_FAILURE;

			close(fd);
			*lpDevice = (LPSKYETEK_DEVICE)malloc(sizeof(SKYETEK_DEVICE));
			memset((*lpDevice),0,sizeof(SKYETEK_DEVICE));
      			strcpy((*lpDevice)->friendly,address);
      			strcpy((*lpDevice)->address,address);
  			strcpy((*lpDevice)->type,SKYETEK_SERIAL_DEVICE_TYPE);
			SerialDevice_InitDevice(*lpDevice);
			return SKYETEK_SUCCESS;
	}

	return SKYETEK_FAILURE;
}

unsigned int
SerialDeviceFactory_DiscoverDevices(
  LPSKYETEK_DEVICE  **lpDevices
  )
{
	struct stat devStat;
	unsigned char buffer[64];
	unsigned int ix, iy, deviceCount;
#ifdef LINUX
  char* devPrefixes[] = {"/dev/ttyS", "/dev/ttyUSB", "/dev/spi/", "/dev/i2c/", NULL};
  char* devPaths[] = { NULL };
#elif defined(__sun)
  char* devPrefixes[] = { NULL };
  char* devPaths[] = {"/dev/term/a", "/dev/term/b", NULL};
#else
#error No platform dependent paths specified
#endif

	LPSKYETEK_DEVICE lpDevice;

	deviceCount = 0;

  for(iy = 0; devPrefixes[iy] != NULL; iy++)
  {
    /* Do 2 ports per device type*/
    for(ix = 0; ix < 2; ix++)
    {
      snprintf(buffer, 64, "%s%d", devPrefixes[iy], ix);

      if(stat(buffer, &devStat) == -1)
        continue;

      if( SerialDeviceFactory_CreateDevice(buffer, &lpDevice) != SKYETEK_SUCCESS )
        continue;

      deviceCount++;
      *lpDevices = (LPSKYETEK_DEVICE*)realloc(*lpDevices, (deviceCount * sizeof(LPSKYETEK_DEVICE)));
      (*lpDevices)[(deviceCount - 1)] = lpDevice;
    }
  }

  for(iy = 0; devPaths[iy] != NULL; iy++)
  {
    if(stat(devPaths[iy], &devStat) == -1)
      continue;

    if( SerialDeviceFactory_CreateDevice(devPaths[iy], &lpDevice) != SKYETEK_SUCCESS )
      continue;

    deviceCount++;
    *lpDevices = (LPSKYETEK_DEVICE*)realloc(*lpDevices, (deviceCount * sizeof(LPSKYETEK_DEVICE)));
    (*lpDevices)[(deviceCount - 1)] = lpDevice;
  }

  fflush(stderr);

	return deviceCount;
}
#endif

int
SerialDeviceFactory_FreeDevice(
  LPSKYETEK_DEVICE lpDevice
  )
{
  if( lpDevice == NULL || lpDevice->internal == NULL )
    return 0;
  if( lpDevice->internal == &SerialDeviceImpl )
  {
    if( SerialDevice_Free(lpDevice) )
      return 1;
  }
  return 0;
}

void
SerialDeviceFactory_FreeDevices(
  LPSKYETEK_DEVICE    *lpDevices,
  unsigned int        count
  )
{
  unsigned int ix = 0;
	if(lpDevices == NULL)
		return;
  for( ix = 0; ix < count; ix++ )
  {
    if( lpDevices[ix] != NULL )
    {
      if( lpDevices[ix]->internal == &SerialDeviceImpl )
      {
        SerialDeviceFactory_FreeDevice(lpDevices[ix]);
        lpDevices[ix] = NULL;
      }
    }
  }
}

DEVICE_FACTORY SerialDeviceFactory = {
  SKYETEK_SERIAL_DEVICE_TYPE,
  SerialDeviceFactory_DiscoverDevices,
  SerialDeviceFactory_FreeDevices,
  SerialDeviceFactory_CreateDevice,
  SerialDeviceFactory_FreeDevice
};

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Partial Class SOM
    Inherits System.Web.UI.UserControl

#Region " Web Form Designer Generated Code "

    'This call is required by the Web Form Designer.
    <System.Diagnostics.DebuggerStepThrough()> Private Sub InitializeComponent()

    End Sub

    'NOTE: The following placeholder declaration is required by the Web Form Designer.
    'Do not delete or move it.
    Private designerPlaceholderDeclaration As System.Object

    Private Sub Page_Init(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles MyBase.Init
        'CODEGEN: This method call is required by the Web Form Designer
        'Do not modify it using the code editor.
        InitializeComponent()
    End Sub

#End Region

    Public kdID As Int32

    Public Sub Refresh()
        Dim SqlAdapter1 As New SqlClient.SqlDataAdapter("SELECT TOP 1 'Status' AS UnitName, 'AVAILABLE (0)' AS [1], 'AVAILABLE (' + CAST(dbo.WLReturnTime(kdID, 0) AS nvarchar(2)) + ')' AS [2], 'AVAILABLE (' + CAST(dbo.WLReturnTime(kdID, 1) AS nvarchar(2)) + ')' AS [3], 'AVAILABLE (' + CAST(dbo.WLReturnTime(kdID, 2) AS nvarchar(2)) + ')' AS [4], 'AVAILABLE (' + CAST(dbo.WLReturnTime(kdID, 3) AS nvarchar(2)) + ')' AS [5] FROM WLs WHERE kdID = " & kdID, New SqlClient.SqlConnection(Session.Item("sqlConnectionStr")))
        Dim SqlDataSet1 As New Data.DataSet
        Dim SqlDataSet2 As New Data.DataSet
        Session.Item("sqlConnection").Open()
        SqlAdapter1.Fill(SqlDataSet1)
        Session.Item("sqlConnection").Close()
        Dim SqlCommand1 As New SqlClient.SqlCommand("SELECT dbo.UnitName(e.UnitType) AS UnitName, dbo.UnitsHome(e.kdID, e.UnitType) AS [1], a.[Out] AS [2], b.[Out] AS [3], c.[Out] AS [4], d.[Out] AS [5] FROM UnitsTraining e, UnitsOut a, UnitsOut b, UnitsOut c, UnitsOut d WHERE a.WLID = 0 AND b.WLID = 1 AND c.WLID = 2 AND d.WLID = 3 AND a.UnitType = e.UnitType AND b.UnitType = e.UnitType AND c.UnitType = e.UnitType AND d.UnitType = e.UnitType AND a.kdID = e.kdID AND b.kdID = e.kdID AND c.kdID = e.kdID AND d.kdID = e.kdID AND e.kdID = " & kdID & " AND dbo.UnitResearched(e.kdID, e.UnitType) = 1 ORDER BY e.UnitType", Session.Item("sqlConnection"))
        SqlAdapter1.SelectCommand = SqlCommand1
        Session.Item("sqlConnection").Open()
        SqlAdapter1.Fill(SqlDataSet2)
        Session.Item("sqlConnection").Close()
        Dim x As Int32
        For x = 0 To SqlDataSet2.Tables(0).Rows.Count - 1
            Dim NewRow As System.Data.DataRow = SqlDataSet1.Tables(0).NewRow()
            NewRow.ItemArray = SqlDataSet2.Tables(0).Rows(x).ItemArray
            SqlDataSet1.Tables(0).Rows.InsertAt(NewRow, x + 1)
        Next
        DataGrid1.DataSource = SqlDataSet1
        DataGrid1.DataBind()
        DataGrid1.Style.Add("border-collapse", "asdfhsg")
    End Sub
End Class