[ConsentofGoverned]

thanks for your reply: as for BOXHORN. the BSC method is stated as unworkable, then new definitions of species differing are given: (if you can't prove a new species and the literature has few sources then make up new rules to define speciation.) after reading the reports of new species listed mainly plants and fly..Any intelligent person would laugh. a fly is a fly, a maze is a maze.
when you show a true change from fish to mammal well then your hypothesis that evolution is leading to new species could hold water , otherwise birds that cannot interbreed are still birds, not fish. no?

[Lurking Libertarian]

after reading the reports of new species listed mainly plants and fly..Any intelligent person would laugh. a fly is a fly, a maze is a maze.

You are confusing species with genus with order with phylum, etc., etc. If two types of fish cannot interbreed, they are different species. They are both "fish," in the same way that wolves, dogs and coyotes are all "canines" and that humans, chimpanzees and gorillas are all "primates," but they are indisputably different species. Because they cannot interbreed, any genetic change that happens in one species cannot possibly spread to the other, and therefore, over time, the differences between them will only grow greater.

when you show a true change from fish to mammal well then your hypothesis that evolution is leading to new species could hold water , otherwise birds that cannot interbreed are still birds, not fish. no?

You are mistaken as to what the theory of evolution predicts. No scientist who accepts evolution ever predicted that a fish would become a mammal in one generation or even in a thousand generations. Evolution works in small steps, which eventually lead to new species (something we have observed in the wild and in the lab) which eventually (over tens of thousands, or even millions, of years) produces entirely new types of creatures.