[BCrago66]

No, this is not evidence - but it is scientific illiteracy.

If an individual possesses condition X, that does qualify him to make conclusive assertions about the cause of condition X in all individuals, or even in himself. E.g., if someone has diabetes or manic-depression, he is not thereby qualified to assert the cause of these consitions in all individuals, on the cause of these conditions in himself. To prove causation requires a chain of evidence; it is not achieved by mere assertion.

[apackof2]

Go to his web site if you dare.
You will see that there are many like him not just one or two indivduals

[TheOtherOne]

If an individual possesses condition X, that does qualify him to make conclusive assertions about the cause of condition X in all individuals, or even in himself. E.g., if someone has diabetes or manic-depression, he is not thereby qualified to assert the cause of these consitions in all individuals, on the cause of these conditions in himself. To prove causation requires a chain of evidence; it is not achieved by mere assertion.

C'mon, you're ruining all the fun.

[ElkGroveDan]

If an individual possesses condition X, that does qualify him to make conclusive assertions about the cause of condition X

Nor does it disqualify him.

[Clint N. Suhks]

To prove causation requires a chain of evidence

Causation of a behavior certainly is provable by confession, how do you account for people turning homosexual in prison or the existence of so-called “bisexuals" or the FACT that there are many more ex-gays in the world than Bennett?