"Dick Beldin"  wrote in message
news:...
> 
> "Jim McGinn"  wrote in message
> news:bfn66c$5ao$1{at}darwin.ediacara.org...
> > "Dick Beldin"  wrote in message
>  news:...
> > > "Jim McGinn"  wrote in message
> > > news:bff4q3$1cin$1{at}darwin.ediacara.org...
> > > > > Here is a quote from Suzuki et al briefly
describing genetic drift:
>  
> > > > > ""If a population is finite in size (as
all populations are) and if
>  a
> > > > > given pair of parents have only a small number of
offspring, then
>  even
> > > > > in the absence of all selective forces, the
frequency of a gene will
>  not
> > > > > be exactly reproduced in the next generation
because of sampling
>  error.
> > > >
> > > > Note how Suzuki et al jumps to the conclusion that the
> > > > observation (a gene will not be exactly reproduced in the
> > > > next generation) dictates the conclusion that the cause of
> > > > this observation is, "sampling error," which
is nonsensical
> > > > in light of the fact that sampling error is not causal.
> > > >
> > > I don't note anything of the sort. Didn't you read that
conclusion into
>  the
> > > citation?
> >
> > Yes, I don't understand your dispute.  Please be more explicit.

> The imperative "note" usually implies that there is evidence
relevant to
> one's thesis. I found none.

Okay, I see what you're saying now.  IMO, Suzuki 
indicated causation with the phrase, " . . . because 
of sampling error . . ."  Now can you see what I'm 
saying?

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 7/24/03 3:16:48 PM