| TIP: Click on subject to list as thread! | ANSI |
| echo: | |
|---|---|
| to: | |
| from: | |
| date: | |
| subject: | Re: Hamilton`s Rule: evad |
Name And Address Supplied wrote:-
> > JE:-
> > The BIG issue remains: Hamilton's rule cannot
> > discriminate between just a _phoney_ altruistic gene:
> > a gene that provides a relative loss, but also an
> > absolute _gain_ for the actor, and a _real_ altruistic
> > gene: a gene that provides an absolute loss for the
> > actor. Hamilton's measure is no better than
> > the fraudulent accounting that bankrupted Enron
> > where debits became credits. Hamilton cannot tell
> > a fitness debit (an absolute loss) from a fitness credit
> > (an absolute gain)! NAS has yet to respond to any of
> > these BASIC charges.
> NAS:-
> Because you are unintelligible. Give me a worked example, without
> short cuts, and it might be a little clearer to us as to what you are
> up to.
Here is the example you requested. It
is unambiguous and totally "intelligible"
but I suspect you will never acknowledge
it as such:
--------------quote----------------------
1) 22/01/2004:
JE:-
What is the difference between
a reduced positive c and a negative c?
If c was an abolute measure of fitness
then yes, a real difference exists. However
c is only a relative fitness cost and not
an absolute fitness cost, so what is the
difference?
BOH:-
As far as the rule is concerned, none.
----------- end quote --------------------
Do you agree or disagree with Dr O'Hara's
answer in the quote (above)?
> > JE:-
> > It appears to me that because "Name and Address
> > Supplied" does not supply either his/her name or his/her
> > address (!) he/she is willing to involve himself/herself
> > in a public discussion of this issue.
> NAS:-
> I do publicly involve myself in such discussion, with my name and
> address(es) freely available, and I do this in the most appropriate
> arena - the peer reviewed primary literature.
JE:-
So, sbe is not an "appropriate arena" for
NAS to identify him/her self when discussing
simple, basic issues re: evolutionary theory.
Why is NAS afraid to _publicly_ identify
his/her view of just, evolutionary theory
_basics_?
Regards,
John Edser
Independent Researcher
PO Box 266
Church Pt
NSW 2105
Australia
edser{at}tpg.com.au
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com
---
* RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
* RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 7/22/04 6:08:47 AM
* Origin: MoonDog BBS, Brooklyn,NY, 718 692-2498, 1:278/230 (1:278/230)SEEN-BY: 633/267 270 @PATH: 278/230 10/345 106/1 2000 633/267 |
|
| SOURCE: echomail via fidonet.ozzmosis.com | |
Email questions or comments to sysop@ipingthereforeiam.com
All parts of this website painstakingly hand-crafted in the U.S.A.!
IPTIA BBS/MUD/Terminal/Game Server List, © 2025 IPTIA Consulting™.