A species becomes a species if a qualified taxonomist says it is!

A species becomes a species if a qualified taxonomist says it is! A passage by Dr. Hisham Azmi on the problem of speciation and the definition of type in relation to the theory of evolution Watch the full video here: youtube.com/watch?vjYPBNBGo1zC0 Chapter 4 of the book Design of Life: Speciation is the starting point for everything in the theory of evolution. Harvard evolutionary biologist Ernest Mayer wrote: "Darwin called his great work the origin of species because he was fully aware that the fundamental problem in evolution is change from one species to another."[1] However, Darwin did not give a solution to the "mystery of puzzles" as he himself called it.[2] According to Mayer, Darwin failed to solve the problem he initially addressed in his book. The evolutionary biologist Keith Stewart Thomson wrote in 1997: "The problem that has not yet been solved by biologists is to find the definitive evidence for both evolution" and "the definitive evidence for evolution is speciation, not local adaptation and differentiation between living groups." Before Darwin several centuries of industrial selection proved that species may change by certain limits. This task is not as straightforward as it seems at first glance. That is because biologists have not yet agreed on a single definition of the word species. The evolutionary biologists Jerry A. Coyne and H. Allen Orr, in their 2004 book Speciation, noted that there are more than twenty definitions of species. Assisting biologists in the classification of organisms. Harmony with existing entities in real nature. Help to understand how these entities originate. Representation of evolutionary history. * Applicability to as many organisms as possible. Quinn and Orr acknowledged "that there is no concept of type that fulfills most of these purposes as well as all of them, but felt that the studied problem of type should be identified first before choosing one of the proposed definitions that best solves the problem."[5] Like other Darwinists looking for definitive evidence for evolution, Quinn and Orr chose Ernst Mayr's concept of the species, known as BSC, as naturally mating and reproductively isolated from other similar groups. Why did Quinn and Orr choose this concept among others? The great benefit of BSC for them is that it directly suggests a research program to explain the existence of the entity that the species defines. Unfortunately, the BSC definition applies only to sexually reproducing species, and cannot be applied to species that reproduce in asexual ways such as germs that distinguish their species on formal and biochemical grounds. Nor can it be applied to dead organisms such as fossils, whose species can be distinguished solely on the basis of formal traits. Apart from all these shortcomings in the BSC definition, it is a disadvantage to be the first instigator of Darwinists in defining the definition of type is that the BSC definition leads to a body of research that seems to agree with their theory. Several previous scientific theories, including ptolemaic astronomy and thermodynamics, have instigated a flood of experimental and observational research, but ultimately proved to be fundamentally wrong. The ability of the scientific principle to clear the way for further research says nothing about whether or not it provides a correct understanding of nature. Quinn and Orr are like a man looking for something under the street light because it's the only part of the street that's lit. If that thing a man's looking for isn't even there, his search will fail. By choosing the BSC definition of gender, Orr and Quinn make the same mistake. Video clip attached to the post: https://www.diyaa-alandalus.com/api/media/videos/braheen-org-3200942639931577-6bb4dad3.mp4 — Source: Published on Facebook's "Braheen Center" page https://www.facebook.com/braheen.org/videos/3200942639931577