In article ,
 "John Edser"  wrote:

> William Morse 
> 
> > > Since there is no "forwards" in evolutionary
terms, it's a difficult
> > > question to answer.  If you mean "forwards" to
mean more complexity,
> > > then it is generally evident in the fossil record that such steps do
> > > occur.  If an organism becomes more survivable with less complexity,
> > > it may in fact be a step forward.  It depends only on whether a
> > > simpler organism is more likely to survive and reproduce, nothing
> > > more.  "Direction" is a human attribution to a
directionless process.
> 
> > WM:-
> > No. The process has direction, it just doesn't have a goal. There are
> > very clear individual directions: flight, vision, dexterity, sociality,
> > communication, intelligence, and size (both extremes) to name a few.
> > These are not coordinated in any overall direction, and may well compete.
> > And simplicity is as much a direction as redundancy. But there are
> > directions.
> 
> JE:-
> The direction of evolution is always to
> increase the Darwinian fitness maximand
> as measured per Darwinian selectee per
> population. This maximand is defined as:
> 
> The total number of fertile forms reproduced
> per parent into one population.
> 
> Everything that living
> nature has or will produce is deducible from
> just this _one_ maximand embedded within
> a self consistent theory structure.
> This Darwinian theory of evolution
> by natural selection _can_ be tested to
> refutation via an experiment using a
> natural population (not just a model).
> Please note: Neo Darwinism revisions of
> Darwinian theory cannot be tested to
> refutation only to no verification
> where only refutation is definitive.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> John Edser
> Independent Researcher

*
What the hell is a *maximand*?

earle
*
---
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 10/31/04 4:54:52 PM