No, and stop straw-manning me. I'm not making any direct assertions, although environment does greatly affect the outcome of the test. My point is, if you have a specific goal for an experiment/study, then it'd be great to record all the possible factors to arrive at a proper conclusion. The factors involved in this test are too little and too broad in the context of the goal they're trying to achieve. The reason why they're too little and too broad is because there is no possible way to determine a genetic fact if they are only relying on studies with a one dimensional factor (aside from the math), such as, the relationship these participants have with each other, and nothing else. If all you can reply with is, "The community of experts agree with this conclusion, therefore it's true." Then there's no point in arguing with you, since you don't hold the knowledge necessary to properly confront my point. I'm not undermining the competence of the people who perform these studies, but I am only pointing out what is perceived to be an inconsistency, which is, missing factors.