So what? If evolution were true, then this could not be an impediment to evolution. Single celled organisms - the first organisms on earth - are still the most common life on earth. So much so that in spite of their minute size (they are even smaller than the average human cell of which each person has some 100 trillion) they constitute some 90% of the biological mass on earth. They are also found everywhere - including in places where even humans and roaches cannot be found. So clearly these organisms had no necessity to evolve into higher species.
Furthermore, there is no geographic isolation between any of the human populations.
Again - see above. I am beginning to wonder if this hero of evolution is really an evolutionist.
Today there is far too much contact among all human populations for any kind of effective long-term isolation that might lead to speciation.
Speciation is not evolution. Splitting the gene pool of a species does not create new genetic information, it only decreases the genetic information of each new species, it makes the species less viable, not more viable and it does not add any new functioning. Like natural selection, speciation cannot be the source of more complex forms, of more complex organisms, so this hero of evolution is talking more garbage.
To be sure, there is abundant genetic variation within the human genotype to serve as material for appropriate selection, but modern conditions are very different from the time when some populations of Homo erectus evolved into Homo sapiens. At that time, our species consisted of small troops, in each of which there was strong natural selection with a premium on those characteristics that eventually resulted in Homo sapiens.
The question that must be asked again of this hero of evolution is how can selection which destroys genetic information create a more complex species? Clearly it cannot be the source of it. That he denies any source other than selection for the creation of new species shows quite well that at least according to his criteria, evolution is impossible.
However, genetic deterioration is not an immediate danger, considering the high variability of the human gene pool.
Again Mayr precludes the possibility of creation of any new genetic information. Selecting destroys information, it does not add to it and therefore cannot create complexity which is what evolution claims is how we descended from single celled organisms.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... HAHAHAHA... HAHAHAHAHA... hehehe... hehe... <giggle> whew! Thanks, I needed a good laugh.
Yeah, gore3000, you're right: Speciation happens when the offspring have half the chromosomes of their parents. Keep telling those stupid lame evolutionist what for. You'll get your Nobel Prize yet...