Ok above are two species of Helens.
Now do I have to lock you in a jar for 49 generations before you will demonstrate "positive assortative mating" tendencies between these two species?
Remember the experiment started out with mutant flies not normal flies. Let's say we did the experiment with humans and you had a jar of Helen Thomas offspring in one jar and a jar of Helen Hunt offspring in the other. Now 40 generations later do you think the Helen Hunt jar men are going to have any desire whatsover to engage in mating rituals with the Helen Thomas jar women?
Now, are they a different "species" because they don't want to mate?
"Ok above are two species of Helens."
I'm pressing the abuse button. Do you realize that posting the picture of Helen Thomas next to the picture of Helen Hunt does not enhance the beauty of Hunt but magnifies the horror of Thomas. That alone should show the logical outcome of the "survival of the fittest". Who wants it?
What a grotesque thought!
Now, are they a different "species" because they don't want to mate?
The criterion is whether, without help, they mate or not. The reason doesn't really matter; if they don't, the two gene pools are separate.
EG, ligars ond tigons have never, AFAIK, been found in the wild. But there are places (India, other parts of Asia) where their habitats overlap, so there is no physical barrier like an ocean preventing mating.
Therefore, lions and tigers are different species
Ditto for horses, asses, zebras, etc.
There are species of birds that are interfertile (like lions and tigers), but never interbreed because of differences in their songs or other courtship behavior. Since the gene pools are separated, they count as different species.
Thank you for your post!
What WE HOPE Muslim bombers get 72 of!