jimmcginn{at}yahoo.com (Jim McGinn) wrote in message
news:...
> jimmcginn{at}yahoo.com (Jim McGinn) wrote 
> 
> > [moderator's note: I'd caution Brian and everyone else that
> > discussion in s.b.e. is hardly authoritative. While we have
> > our share of sober-minded evolution professionals, we also have
> > our share of eager tyros, and perhaps more than our share of
> > just plain contrariness. It may be a useful source of references
> > in the professional literature, however, and in many cases, the
> > talk.origins FAQ documents are also useful, at www.talkorigins.org.
> > Good luck. - JAH]
> 
> As I explain previously, the logic of Hamilton's kin selection 
> pivots off of nothing but an erroneous application of english 
> (specifically it involves misusage of the word share which 
> involves two different meanings of the word being used 
> interchangeably).  When this misusage is corrected Hamilton's 
> kin selection falls like a house of cards.  This is true 
> regardless of whether the person investigating it is or is not 
> a "sober-minded evolution professional."
> 
> [moderator's note: I agree that one should examine Jim's previous
> claims on this matter. - JAH]
> 

I'm certainly interested to hear why Jim thinks that "the logic of
Hamilton's kin selection pivots off of nothing but an erroneous
application of english".

But this would require either 

i) I do alot of work sifting through past posts to this newsgroup to
pick through threads and conversations to try to glean exactly why Jim
thinks this way

or

ii) Jim does alot of work re-typing out his argument, which I would
read, and determine whether he has anything interesting to say about
kin selection.


Neither seems entirely satisfactory, since if Jim is intent on
challenging the foundations of kin selection theory the onus is really
on him to bring the theory to us in an intelligible form. But then, it
would be unfair on Jim to make him do all this typing each time
someone enquires as to his rationale for such bold claims.

I believe I have an answer. Couldn't Jim prepare an article to be
posted on the SBE website? In my opinion, a scientific journal would
be a far more appropriate context for such discussion (I previously
suggested the Journal of Theoretical Biology, which after all is where
Hamilton published his 1964 papers) but it seems that Jim is
uncomfortable with this. So perhaps an article on the webpage would
make a suitable compromise?

What do you think, Jim?
---
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 6/7/04 10:22:28 PM