[donh]

My question is very reasonable. As one can readily see, the likelihood of such a sequence is so remote as to be virtually impossible? If it wasn't, you would have offered up a rational response. "Surely you are kidding?" does not cut it.

ok, you really weren't kidding: that's not how it works.

Only one mutational event in one individual is needed for a population to capture a useful mutation, and one successful mutational event does not create a new species which can't interbreed with the old species.

Speciation is an extremely gradual separation of two related populations, with accompanying extremely gradual attenuation of their capacity to interbreed. The picture you are operating on as to how speciation occurs is oversimplified to the point of distortion.

[Dimensio]

Only one mutational event in one individual is needed for a population to capture a useful mutation, and one successful mutational event does not create a new species which can't interbreed with the old species.

I could have sworn that this was explained in detail, ad nauseum to a creationist who steadfastly refused to get the point and insisted that evolution demands one species produce offspring of a completely different species no matter how clearly it was explained that this is not the case. And, for some reason, I feel like the creationist in question was connectthedots, but I don't put a lot of stock in my memory, so I don't want to say that I'm sure. I do clearly remember a creationist quite obviously deliberately missing the point, but I can't say for sure that it was the one to whom you are responding presently.