Actually, you meant to say that the cause of evolution is "adaptive speciation via natural selection", however you meant that.
Umm, no. I meant to say: Evolution is adaptive speciation via natural selection. And, I meant that precisely as I said it.
If "adaptive" is inherent in your term, natural selection, then isn't it redundant?
No. One might adapt to any number of things - including the commandments of an intelligent designer.
Perhaps your particular Theory of Evolution might read - evolution is caused by natural selection.
You might read it however you see fit, but the accurate way to read it is exactly as I wrote it.
The 'speciation', however you define it, would be part of the 'fact' of evolution, correct?
I define the 'speciation' exactly the same way a dictionary does. Look it up. And, yes, it is indeed part of the fact of evolution, which is why it is what evolution is, which is what you asked for.
I'm curious - does mutation play a role? And might that find its way into your Theory?
Mutation is by definition an inherent process of speciation, so the answer to your misconceived question is obvious.
You're just being argumentative.
which is why it is what evolution is, which is what you asked for.
As a scientist, I specifically asked if you had a theory to help explain this supposed, 'fact', whatever you thought you meant by - the fact. I grant you that for sake of argument. You don't need to repeat it. Just the theory, please.
Mutation is by definition an inherent process of speciation
Perhaps you should define - speciation. I suspect it harbors your Theory, and you don't even know it. Does speciation also include notions of genetic drift, and populations as opposed to mere individuals, etc? All that would remain is to place natural selection under this all-inclusive rubric and the job would be done.
thanks for saving me the trouble. I doubt further reading will demonstrate that your efforts have had any salutory effect, but one can hope...