"John Edser"  wrote 

> > JMcG:-
> > AFAIC, it's not necessary to refute something the 
> > validity of which as never been demonstrated. 
> 
> JE:-
> We differ as to why the rule is bad
> science. I do not claim to have refuted 
> Hamilton's  Rule, I claim that it 
> remains invalid _because_ it is
> irrefutable and therefore not a valid
> theory of science.

If it's irrefutable then it is, by definition, valid.

 The rule is logical
> but not rational. 

Pure Edserian nonsense.

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 11/21/04 6:08:53 AM