i'm saying that evolution should be a continuing process, and the start and end points should vary from species to species. the fact that we have no conclusive evidence of an observed evolution in the recent past means that macro evolution is non-existent.
It
is a continuing process, sir. And it has been observed, recorded, and can be replayed, sir:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14094-bacteria-make-major-evolutionary-shift-in-the-lab.htmlbut they're not a different species. they're still dogs. to be a different species, they should be biologically distinct from previous dogs.
Would you care to define 'biologically distinct', sir? It's hard to argue that a Great Dane and a Chihuahua aren't 'biologically distinct'. Or that the modern, domestic dog isn't distinct from previous dogs, namely, their ancestors/cousins the wolves.
From what I know, the common definition of species is they have to be able to interbreed. With domestic dogs, a lot of them can't interbreed anymore. They also can't interbreed with wolves, their closest relative in the family
Canidae. Hence, I contend that we're actually witnessing speciation happening, although it'll take more time before full speciation occurs.