The problem with this whole idea is that whenever you split a population group, each new group, while developing new forms, loses some genetic potentials, so the idea that there can be continuous open-ended change is an illusion. Over time the processes that split populations {ABE: and produce new phenotypes} also reduce genetic diversity, which ultimately reaches a point where no further change is possible. It sounds good but it doesn't work. I believe this natural limit to change is the definition of a Kind. Yes, supposedly mutation counteracts this effect, but I think that's mostly a matter of blind faith too.
There is absolutely no evidence to support this that I am aware of...
What "genectic potentials" are even required? I've never even heard of that term (although I'm no biologist).
If understand how all this works... Doesn't every single act of sexual reproduction contribute to genetic diversity? Combining this with mutation seems to be more than adequate for evolution.
I don't understand what you are talking about. You seem to think there is some level of genetic diversity require somehow... what level is that? Can you quantify it? Or did you just make this up?
(I just googled this and couldn't find anything about it)...
How small does a population group have to be before it can't cant any more...
This sounds like wild hypothesizing with no evidence to me....