Comment: For any who argue that a "new species"

(See in situ)

For any who argue that a "new species"

has never been shown to evolve I have two answers:

1. Given the theoretically slow pace of evolution a mere human would not notice the change. Imagine a fruit fly with a 72-hr. lifespan declaring that "humans don't age" since it observed no change in the nearby human during its entire life. That's how humans are compared to the supposed pace of biological change.

2. Notwithstanding #1, there is plenty of evidence of geographically separated populations of one species morphing into another. An example is a salamander that exists only in a certain elevation band along one side of a mountain range, rounding the end of the range, and continuing along the other side until it peters out due to climate difference.

Take samples of the population from a mile apart anywhere along the range and they will interbreed. However, salamanders from the extreme ends of the range cannot interbreed because there have been too many minute changes along the way.

The example shows that genetic change is fluid, that "species" is an artificial construct where reality is not always so neatly compartmentalized.

New Hampshire and Ecuador.