OK. I'll pick out some examples and take'em home tomorrow. What got me suspicious it that Harvey-Weinberg shows that no distribution is inherently unstable over generations, as long as mating is random, the loci in question aren't linked, and mutation is negligible. (Am I on track so far?) What's suspicious to me is that they claim to have tested for H-W equilibrium based on a simple distribution of alleles among a one-time sample from a couple hundred individuals where almost no alleles of the loci they're looking at occur more than once in the entire sample. But that is what they claim to have done, and claim thereby to have more or less proven that the loci are not linked, where somewhere along the line before they get that far they seem to be building on the assumption that the loci are not linked. Circular ...? Or maybe I'm missing something. We'll see what you think when you get here.