J.B.S. Haldane first described the ‘cost of substitution’ and its limitation on the speed of evolution. That gave rise to a problem (see, for example, Dodson), known today as Haldane’s Dilemma. The problem is more severe in organisms with low reproduction rate and long generation time, such as the higher vertebrates: elephants, whales, apes and humans, etc. Evolutionary geneticists saw this as a compelling issue. Maynard-Smith and Kimura each cited it as the main reason for their revolutionary new views of evolutionary process.
Yet the fundamental cost concept fell into long-lived confusion, which limited its deployment. Today, most commentators say the problem is solved, but exhibit little agreement as to why. One modern authority, George C. Williams, asserted, ‘the [Haldane’s Dilemma]
problem was never solved, by Wallace or anyone else’. This paper will show the problem cannot be solved so long as confusion prevails over the fundamentals.
…..
I share with Haldane and Kimura and Crow the belief that quantitative cost arguments ‘should play a part in all future discussions of evolution’. I also agree with George C. Williams that ‘the time has come for renewed discussion and experimental attack on Haldane’s Dilemma’.Walter ReMine
Walter ReMine is a former fellow at the Discovery Institute. His book, Biotic Message is available at ARN, and one will see his name in the acknowledgement section of Bill Dembski’s Design Inference.
I tracked the saga of Walter’s attempt at getting his peer-reviewed paper published. He had prestigious reviewers like Warren Ewens and James Crow reviewing his paper and who acknowledge ReMine was correct.
I think ReMine’s paper on Haldane’s Dilemma is worthy of consideration whether one agrees with him or not. I think he makes a devastating case against the efficacy of Darwinian evolution based on first principles of population genetics in his book Biotic Message and shows how the Darwinian community has obfuscated the real problems into oblivion.
Having faced numerous rejections, and documenting the rejections, ReMine was finally forced to publish his paper as a last resort in a (gasp) creationist journal. If one reads his paper, there is not one reference to God, Intelligent Design, or any theological issue, simply pure science.
He makes well-reasoned arguments from population genetics, and I hope readers will realize the great value of his mathematical contributions to the field. I think his work was not welcome because it hit too close to home for some. But that is my opinion, I will let interested readers decide for themselves.
Cost Theory and the cost of Substitution
and