MACROevolution vs MICROevolution - what is it?

It doesn't demonstrate what happens over longer time periods due to the emergence and fixation of new mutations. It also requires the emergence of new traits through mutations.

The only way mutations could be fixed is if they are selected and other alleles drop out, which is a loss of genetic diversity. You aren't getting a species if new traits are emerging. I'm only talking about how you get a species and that requires selection which requires loss of genetic diversity. You obviously aren't interested in the arugment, you probably haven't even read half the posts I've made where I explain this, you are just going to go on bleating about mutations whether it makes any sense or not.

Are pocket mice not a species because black fur emerged through a mutation? Are peppered moths not a species because they also got black coloration through mutation?New skin colors, lactose intolerance, and many other traits have emerged in the human species through mutation. Are humans not a species?Has it ever occurred to you that we don't define a species by the fixation of mutations? You aren't talking about mutations, which increase genetic diversity. Your argument is that evolution will stop because it runs out of genetic diversity. This is contradicted by the emergence of new genetic diversity in the form of mutations. All you can do is ignore the facts.

You so consistently misread just about e4verything I say it wears me out. Where did I say anything about pocket mice and peppered moths not being species?Evolution does have to stop because it runs out of genetic diversity wherever you are getting new species. Adding mutations is not how you get new species. A mutation has to be selected to contribute to that.

Right here:"You aren't getting a species if new traits are emerging."--FaithBlack fur in pocket mice was the result of new traits emerging. Therefore, by your own argument, pocket mice are not a species. The same applies to peppered moths. The same applies to humans due to the fact that there are many traits that have emerged through mutation. Mutations don't stop when a new species forms. Mutations add genetic diversity.Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

I don't know where you got that quote. It's at least out of context and I've said so much that should show I can't possibly mean the mice and the moths are not species that you are being underhanded in your use of it.You don't get species unless you lose genetic diversity.

And there you said it again. In pocket mice, you have an increase in genetic diversity with the emergence of black fur. Are you saying that pocket mice are not a species?

I see, I get it now. You are failing to see that to get a whole population of black mice requires selection and selection gets rid of all the white mice, which is the reduction in genetic diversity I'm talking about that always has to happen with the formation of a species. Same with the population of white mice, black moths and peppered moths.

If you start with a population of all white mice, then have a population of all black mice, isn't that an equal amount of genetic diversity at the beginning and the end?

HOW MUCH genetic diversity is NOT the point. The point is that TO GET A SPECIES REQUIRES ITS REDUCTION OR LOSS.

Yes, it is the point. You claimed that evolution will run out of genetic diversity. However, we see that there is the same amount of genetic diversity before evolution and after evolution.

Evolution EVENTUALLY will run out of genetic diversity because selection reduces genetic diversity. That is the case with the mice and the moths too. Not all examples show complete loss of genetic diversity, in fact that is very rare, it's the inevitable end point that is rarely reached in reality so far though it will eventually, but all of them show the trend toward it. I think it should be apparent in the end specied of ring species. You keep misunderstanding what I'm saying but you can't make your misunderstanding the meaning of what I'm saying. The principle I'm talking aobut holds up in all cases.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

It will never run out of genetic diversity because mutations increase genetic diversity after selection has reduced it. I just showed you that this is not the case. They started and finished with the same amount of genetic diversity. I understand it just fine. It just happens to be wrong.

I just showed YOU how YOU are wrong. Sorry you don't get it.

You need to point out where "religon" is incorrect in order for your point to be valuable. And I'm sure you have a list of issues and in all likelyhood you are anchoring to someone else. It is extremely typical to see a mainstream point being re-argued repeatedly. In anycase, please reference 1 or 2 issues if you want to be productive in this conversation. :-)