And Allan Miller Proves he is Ignorant of Nested Hierarchies

-
The ignorance never ends over on TSZ. Allan Miller spews:

Inheritance with branching predicts that a nested hierarchy will occur.

Really? Based on what? Linnaean Taxonomy, the observed nested hierarchy, doesn't have anything to do with   "Inheritance with branching". So what is this nested hierarchy that "Inheritance with branching" based on? Is it based on shared characteristics? Then "Inheritance with branching" would predict a smooth blending of characteristics that would blur all lines of distinction that nested hierarchies require.

Look, morons, humans produce nested hierarchies and not nature. Nested hierarchies require defined levels and defined sets. Nature doesn't do definitions. As Darwin said:

Extinction has only defined the groups: it has by no means made them; for if every form which has ever lived on this earth were suddenly to reappear, though it would be quite impossible to give definitions by which each group could be distinguished, still a natural classification, or at least a natural arrangement, would be possible.- Charles Darwin chapter 14

Then there is this:

Nested and non-nested hierarchies: nested hierarchies involve levels which consist of, and contain, lower levels. Non-nested hierarchies are more general in that the requirement of containment of lower levels is relaxed. For example, an army consists of a collection of soldiers and is made up of them. Thus an army is a nested hierarchy. On the other hand, the general at the top of a military command does not consist of his soldiers and so the military command is a non-nested hierarchy with regard to the soldiers in the army. Pecking orders and a food chains are also non-nested hierarchies. 

With Allan's mechanism each level is a population. And parent populations do not consist of nor do they contain the daughter populations. But then again evoTARDs are totally ignorant of nested hierarchies.