Re: Felsenstein and reproductive excess

Guy Hoelzer wrote:
> I am not interested in struggling with someone bent
> on obfuscation, so I would rather end the discourse
> now in that case.

I claim the cost of substitution was garbled at its fundamentals. And
nothing is more fundamental than the concept of "reproductive excess."
If you cannot understand that basic concept, then I suggest you start
with the existing cost-literature. Either you can find a clear
definition of "reproductive excess" or you cannot. If you cannot, then
my thesis is already established. If you can, then that difficulty is
cleared away, and we can move onward. But I am not interested in
struggling with someone playing dumb. If you have questions, look in
the literature first, and don't blame me if you cannot find clarity
there.

-- Walter ReMine
Haldane's Dilemma
http://www1.minn.net/~science/Haldane.htm


.