<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: The Three Necessary and Sufficient Conditions of Natural Selection	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://gregladen.com/blog/2008/02/05/the-three-necessary-and-suffic-1/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2008/02/05/the-three-necessary-and-suffic-1/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2008 07:54:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.6</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Felicia Gilljam		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2008/02/05/the-three-necessary-and-suffic-1/#comment-3568</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Felicia Gilljam]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2008 07:54:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2008/02/05/the-three-necessary-and-suffic-1/#comment-3568</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Thank you so much for stating that sexual selection is just a subset of natural selection. This always seemed obvious to me and yet it&#039;s so frequently treated as a distinct and separate &quot;force&quot; (I think physicists may object to this use of the word - in fact I think physicists may object to you calling gravity a force, too :P - I have usually heard NS, genetic drift etc referred to as the mechanisms of evolution rather than forces). I never really understood why; as long as you understand that adaptation isn&#039;t about survival but about FITNESS ... well. I&#039;ll stop ranting. ;)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you so much for stating that sexual selection is just a subset of natural selection. This always seemed obvious to me and yet it&#8217;s so frequently treated as a distinct and separate &#8220;force&#8221; (I think physicists may object to this use of the word &#8211; in fact I think physicists may object to you calling gravity a force, too 😛 &#8211; I have usually heard NS, genetic drift etc referred to as the mechanisms of evolution rather than forces). I never really understood why; as long as you understand that adaptation isn&#8217;t about survival but about FITNESS &#8230; well. I&#8217;ll stop ranting. 😉</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Greg Laden		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2008/02/05/the-three-necessary-and-suffic-1/#comment-3567</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Greg Laden]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 17:37:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2008/02/05/the-three-necessary-and-suffic-1/#comment-3567</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Bob:  I think my point here is similar to yours.  The ordering is a pedagogical tool, not a functional description of the process.  Stephen and bob:  Exactly.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bob:  I think my point here is similar to yours.  The ordering is a pedagogical tool, not a functional description of the process.  Stephen and bob:  Exactly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: bob koepp		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2008/02/05/the-three-necessary-and-suffic-1/#comment-3566</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[bob koepp]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 14:27:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2008/02/05/the-three-necessary-and-suffic-1/#comment-3566</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[As an aside, since you want to subsume what is usually called &#039;artificial selection&#039; under your definition, why not drop the &#039;natural&#039; and just say you&#039;re stating the necessary and sufficient conditions for a selection process?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As an aside, since you want to subsume what is usually called &#8216;artificial selection&#8217; under your definition, why not drop the &#8216;natural&#8217; and just say you&#8217;re stating the necessary and sufficient conditions for a selection process?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Stephen		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2008/02/05/the-three-necessary-and-suffic-1/#comment-3565</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stephen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 14:15:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2008/02/05/the-three-necessary-and-suffic-1/#comment-3565</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Good definition.  I think it&#039;s worth pointing out that &quot;biological system&quot; is not one of the three requirements.  To my mind, one of the coolest things about natural selection is that it applies universally; if those three conditions are satisfied, there&#039;s no way you can &lt;i&gt; stop &lt;/i&gt; something from evolving, be it a biological species, a language, a computer program, or whatever.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good definition.  I think it&#8217;s worth pointing out that &#8220;biological system&#8221; is not one of the three requirements.  To my mind, one of the coolest things about natural selection is that it applies universally; if those three conditions are satisfied, there&#8217;s no way you can <i> stop </i> something from evolving, be it a biological species, a language, a computer program, or whatever.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: bob koepp		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2008/02/05/the-three-necessary-and-suffic-1/#comment-3564</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[bob koepp]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 12:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2008/02/05/the-three-necessary-and-suffic-1/#comment-3564</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[No objections, except for the bit about the &quot;ordering&quot; of the three conditions being important. All three must be present, period. Ordering is simply an artifact of exposition (i.e., not being able to say three distinct things at once).]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No objections, except for the bit about the &#8220;ordering&#8221; of the three conditions being important. All three must be present, period. Ordering is simply an artifact of exposition (i.e., not being able to say three distinct things at once).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: TrekJunke		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2008/02/05/the-three-necessary-and-suffic-1/#comment-3563</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[TrekJunke]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 12:35:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2008/02/05/the-three-necessary-and-suffic-1/#comment-3563</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Extremely well put.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Extremely well put.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
