A test for claimed knowledge of how macroevolution occurs

Mutations would start occurring right after the genetic bottleneck. This would start increasing genetic variation over time.

All vertebrates are born with mutations. The process never stops.If you think I am wrong, then please cite studies showing that when a breed is formed they all stop producing mutations.

Or, the new mutation can be the basis of a new breed.Either way, mutations continue to happen and increase variation. Please show that new mutations are not happening in those populations.

Flat Earthers are not convinced the Earth is round, and yet it is still round. Reality has this strange property of not conforming itself to our beliefs.More to the point, your creation model can not explain the observed facts.The evolutionary model does explain these facts, and you have not presented any arguments showing that the evolutionary model does not predict these observed facts.All we are left with is your denial in the face of overwhelming evidence. It is nothing more than Flat Earthism.

You don't have to remove new mutations to create a new species. You can select for the new mutations and remove the original alleles through selection. Rinse and repeat.Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

How is that a problem? Again, how is that a problem? Why would an evolving species need to keep ancestral alleles in order for evolution to happen?

You are forgetting about the mutations that happen along the way which increases genetic diversity. If you have both increases and decreases then you have the same amount of diversity through the whole process. Some alleles are added and some are removed. They balance each other out.

Humans aren't homogenous. No species is homogenous. Every species has alleles for different genes. There is genetic diversity among cheetahs, even if it is low. You are ignoring mutations. If the two populations are not interbreeding then different mutations will start to build up in each population which results in divergence over time. You are ignoring mutations.

No single genome is homogeneous. I don't know of any diploid species where the two copies of their genome in each cell both have the same exact alleles for every gene. I would strongly suspect that you are heterozygous for many alleles.

Can you please point to a specific allele and explain why it could not be produced by mutations? Which differences are you saying could not be product of mutations?Can you show us a single difference between the chimp and human genomes that mutations could not produce? If not, then your claims fall flat.

If they have high genetic diversity then they aren't homogeneous. I don't think you understand the meaning of those words.Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

That's false. You get new phenotypes by mutation. The step where genetic diversity is lost is during the selection phase which comes after the emergence of the new phenotype.A great example of this process is seen in the Lederberg plate replica experiment. In this experiment they select for antibiotic resistance. The mutations that confer antibiotic resistance happen early, and are only later selected for.Just a moment...Before selection you have a lot of variation caused by mutations, and a lot of phenotypes. When you apply selection, in the form of antibiotics, you reduce variation, but also selection for the pre-existing new phenotype.

Have you looked at the human population? Have you ever surveyed phenotypic diversity among wildebeests? I'm guessing you haven't.

That's not what I asked. I asked for you to point to a single genetic difference between alleles that could not be produced by mutations. You claim that alleles can not be produced this way, so back up your claim. Point to a change that mutations can't produce and explain why.

You will also get new mutations because each and every generation has new mutations. Why do you keep ignoring this fact?