[Nebullis]

That stuff Aquinasfan posts which is just the Duane Gish parody of punk-eek. "One day a dinosaur gave birth to a bird! But where was there another bird for it to mate with?"

We could give Aquinasfan benefit of the doubt and assume that he is wondering about the evolution of reproductive barriers where geographic isolation is not a determining factor for speciation.

First, organisms in which drastic genetic upsets create a reproductive barrier, such as polyploidy in plants, normally have asexual methods of reproduction.

Second, genetic mutations lead to a progression of reproductive isolation. The first mutation is somewhat isolating, a further mutation leads to male gamete insterility, a further mution leads to female gamete insterility, and so forth. Thus, at each level, there is opportunity for reproduction within a group of like or near-like individuals.

Third, major genetic mutations, for instance, chromosome fusion, are not necessarily the cause of reproductive isolation and are carried forward in the next generation as rare mutations, initially.

If a mutation is sufficiently large to cause instant reproductive isolation and there is no asexual option, the organism simply doesn't reproduce.

[Aquinasfan]

Thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt. We all know the story. The problem is, there isn't any evidence.

My question is: how does punk eek explain the gaps in the fossil record and the fossil rule of morphological stasis better than variation by micromutation, if punk eek is variation by micromutation (in "isolated groups").

I don't see how it solves the problem that it was brought forward to resolve.

[gore3000]

Seems you somewhat agree with Aquinasfan and the anti-evolutionists in asserting that the continuation of reproductive capacity is a problem for evolution. It certainly hinders it and forces it to "tread more slowly" than would otherwise be possible.