>Even the extream case of elitism you give, which is an exception
>rather than a rule, does not satisfy Dawkins' description of
>Evolution. You _can't_ go down the hill. Ever. (Actually, he
>does give a few rare exceptions, but you're cloning example does
>not fit them.)
Again, I am suspicious: WHERE in "CMI" does Dawkins say that Evolution
*can't* go down the hill?
I remember him discussing the "down hill" issue in Seattle. As I
understand him, the *only* way to go to a higher hill is "down, then up".
He mentioned about prosperous times as good for the down hill trip.
Abundance of food allows more less-fit individuals to go quite a way down,
and then climb up.
>; >If a less-fit offspring is fit enough to reproduce, that's good
>; >enough.
WHERE does Dawkins say it's not? A quote is always a good thing
(if it *is* a quote :-)).
---------------------
Tad Niwinski from TeTa where people grow
3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592307816
4062862089986280
Danger!!! Danger!!! DANGER!!!
The Level-3 Hypocrisy Virus (L3HV) is threatening YOU and your children!
PROTECT yourself: never talk to an infected person without a condom!