" *Kinds* isn't a meaningful scientific term. The word is species."
Species isn't really meaningful either. So, you're saying nothing. But you know that. Coyotes, wolves and dogs in general are all dogs and can interbreed to great extent, yet, there are species level deliniations where there is no real breeding boundary if memory serves. Species isn't an exact term. And people generally - no - specifically expect speciation to be exactly what it started out to be, something producing something other than it was. If the end result is corn and the beginning was corn, there was no change. You still have corn. If it becomes something that is not corn, there you have a different "species". That would be the common sense.
"It is when one species (population within a species to be more precise) becomes a new one. Again, there are more than one species of corn."
A new one? How do you know. Oh, that's right, you've just never seen it before. For all we know it could be you just never seen it before.. Gee, hand to forehead moment (for you).
"You've just lost the debate"
No, you'd like that to be the case. You have yet to join it in any meaningful terms. I noted my examples are purposedly absurd. They also demonstrate something you haven't, an end where something "new" exists. On the other hand, it isn't that absurd given a plant with a mouth called the venus fly trap.. Something wrong with corn defending itself from bugs or becoming carnivorous like the fly trap that stunts your growth? No, you just want to beg off at earliest opportunity hoping to claim a win with smoke like Dimensio et al. Next.