[Ichneumon]

For that which comes out is no new creation." (Science, Jan. 20, 1922; from an address by Professor William Bateson addressing a group of scientists in Toronto) So talk.origins is still using an experiment for evidence for evolution that was rejected by the scientific community as long ago as 1922

This is a gross misrepresentation. Rejection by one person (Bateson) does not count as "rejected by the scientific community". One dissent does not a consensus make -- and the "scientific community" is a community of consensus.

I can't find any details on the reason for Bateson's dissent, but it's probably significant that Bateson was a strong advocate of the "saltation" hypothesis of evolution ("hopeful monsters"), which has long been discredited. As such, it seems likely that he rejected the example on ideological grounds because, like DittoJed2, he had a personal overestimate about how "big" a speciation event would have to look.

If anything, you have it backwards -- it's Bateson's paradigm which has been "rejected by the scientific community".

[DittoJed2]

I don't have an overestimation. I know you all say it happened gradually and that means baby steps. I'm saying it can't happen the way you say it. Sheesh! I understand you guys and am not being "naive" as I was accused of being earlier. I just disagree with the genetic possibilities of what Evolution claims as being true. Mutation has a stopping point and kind sticks with kind (and several subsections within the kind).