Our first premise is contained in this article entitled "O brother, where art thou? The fraternal birth-order effect on male sexual orientation". The article
"provides evidence that the social influence of an older brother is irrelevant to whether his younger brother will develop a homosexual orientation. It is the number of older biological brothers the mother carried, not the presence of older brothers while growing up, that makes some boys grow up to be gay. Older stepbrothers in the home have no effect, although older biological brothers raised apart still exert their influence. These data, by elimination, strengthen the notion that the common denominator between biological brothers, the mother, provides a prenatal environment that fosters homosexuality in her younger sons."The second premise is contained in this article which states that
"Just over half of younger siblings questioned said it was easy to be humorous, compared with just a third of those who were first-born.So the first premise, gay men tend to have older brothers and the second premise younger siblings are more likely to be funny and the conclusion is gay men are funny.
And just 11% of only children had the skill, according to the study of 1,000 people by psychologist Richard Wiseman."
Ok, so I really did not prove the it. But the two articles combined suggests that the proportion of gay men within the set of all funny men should be higher than the proportion of gay men in the set of unfunny men or the set of all men. In fact maybe I have it all backwards, maybe gay men are not funny, maybe funny men are gay? :)