[Dan Day]

You'll have to explain to me how the "expected value" for the probability of a mutation being passed to offspring is 100% when you admit that mutations such as two-headed snakes WON'T propagate to their offspring.

Because detrimental mutations like having two heads strongly tend to be weeded out (by interfering with propagation), whereas neutral mutations (the sort being discussed) don't.

It's apples and oranges. Different forces are at work on each, and thus it's no surprise that the results will differ.

I even pointed that out in the part of my post which you quoted in your post, try actually reading it next time.

[Southack]

You'll have to explain to me how the "expected value" for the probability of a mutation being passed to offspring is 100% when you admit that mutations such as two-headed snakes WON'T propagate to their offspring. - Southack

"Because detrimental mutations like having two heads strongly tend to be weeded out (by interfering with propagation), whereas neutral mutations (the sort being discussed) don't." - Dan Day

Your point above merely confirms your original error. Mutations can not have a 100% expected probability of being passed on to offspring if it can be demonstrated that any mutations fail to be inherited, such as the example you cite above.