3 ms·

About the EEA, scroll down to "Assumption 2" here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1745-9125.12049 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.

• unknownkadath 8y ago
  This article, and the Barnes and Simon article it is critiquing, are not exactly casual reading, friend. Are you the author of this article? Could you break it down a bit for an interested outsider? In particular, if the EEA is not so important, what is the value of including fraternal twins at all, compared to, say, other close siblings? And doesn't it raise questions if a mathematical model gives the same results regardless of whether or not the assumptions used in its development are followed? Also, what do you think of Barnes and Simon's reply: https://www.gwern.net/docs/genetics/heritable/2015-burt.pdf https://www.gwern.net/docs/genetics/heritable/2015-burt.pdf I understand if you don't have time to answer in detail, all of the relevant paper is probably pushing 100 pages of dense inside baseball at this point. I merely wish for the folks with, ahem, deep convictions about heritability up-thread to understand that this paper isn't as unassailable as its press releases are making it out to be.