Robert: What Floyd has given us is a list of hybrids and gene pool isolations. What he has failed to show is speciation (an active noun). That is where has one order been raised from a lower one. It is "el-zippo" since Adam my dear friend. Sorry.Floyd: OK, allow me to quote Dobzhansky (1937) who defined "speciation" as "...that stage of the evolutionary process at which the once actually or potentially interbreeding array of forms becomes segregated into two or more separate arrays which are physiologically incapable of interbreeding." This is the defnition accepted by all biologists and all other scientists working in this field.
Again I must explain to you that your understanding of evolution is incorrect. You REALLY DO NOT understand what you're arguing against if you think that speciation is equivalent to "improvement" or "progress" or "raising" something from a "lower" order. The type of process you are discussing is Lamarkian, and not Darwinian. Evolution is not the same as progress, and Darwinian theory is not the same as Lamarkian theory. Whoever offered you the definition of speciation that you cited was either lying to you or was uninformed of the past 70 years of biological research. As a result, this posting is another straw-man, and your argument is logically invalid.
Please, please PLEASE, Robert, at least TRY to understand the theory you are arguing against. It is impossible for you to construct an effective counter-argument otherwise.
In addition, there is considerable evidence that Darwinian evolution has occurred, not only in our own lineage, but in all other clades that have been studied. If you wish to use the existence of "Adam" as part of your counter-argument, would you be willing to provide some material, measurable evidence of his existence please? That would make it possible for others to evaluate your position. Thank you.
May Eris fail to mess up your life at any critical moments ;-)
-Floyd
