maximum likelihood (was TREECON 3.0 etc...)

[JAMES O. MCINERNEY]

<mark sidall wrote>

>I have yet to hear a compelling argument for something with a worse fit
>to the data having a better p-value than something with a better fit but
>then I don't claim to fully (or perhaps even partially) understand
>maximum liklihood.

neither do I......Is there any where I can find a basic exposition of maximum
likelihood, the underlying assumptions and the relative merits of the method.
What I'm looking for is something like the review which caro-beth stewart wrote
in NATURE a while back on maximum parsimony (readable, understandable etc..).
Better still a discussion on the net would be of great benefit.

Cheers,

James