Sad news: baby elephant has died.

[Quinn]

I guess to some degree this is an issue of semantics. I think it's more likely that if anything, what the evidence shows is that there might be a "risk-taking" gene, or something to that effect, ie. willingness to take risks in order to gain - and certainly I think you could justify almost any criminal act as being adaptive (murder is often attributed to jealousy, and jealousy is certainly adaptive). It would be interesting to do a follow-up study with those twin pairs to look for more evidence of this (legal, deviant behaviour). There's also a problem in the field of criminology in that politics and belief systems tend to become significant factors, and may affect research validity - a lack of objectivity.

I am familiar with Lombroso and his prison studies. I'm not sure what made you think I might put some stock in his work? As you said, it's about as valid as Lamarck's. I am also familiar with Eysenck, but am not his largest fan.