John edser 2012-02-20 18:11:22
PO Box 266
Me again 2012-02-20 18:12:59
I will concede that a suitable amendment to what I wrote would be to make
sure that every instance of “absolute fitness” would be preceded by “one
Edserian”, but that otherwise my interpretation of your counting of absolute
fitnesses was generously accommodating of your own definition an absolute
fitness-count of 1.
With amendments it would look like this instead:
Since one Edserian abolute fitness is ~exactly~ one reproduced generation,
consisting of _one_ (un, uno, en, odjin, ichi, yksi) individual (organism)
that itself reproduces, and since to be selected in this contex only means
“an individual that actually manages to reproduce at least one individual
offspring _who in turn reproduces_ [NB, the underlined words is how I
generously accommode you concept], one Edserian absolute fitness cannot be
decrease because this is all that absolute fitness stand for…….etc.