Why didn't the pre-Columbian Americans evolve?

[ding]

The evolution of biodiversity: ever-increasing or did it hit a ceiling?

Increasing knowledge on historical patterns of biodiversity could also help us understand animals’ ability to adapt and what climate change means for evolution.The traditional view is that species have increased in diversity continuously over the past 200 million years, particularly in the last...

ec.europa.eu

 

[Seymour Flops]

A misconception that I had was that race and subspecies were equivalent.

As it happens, race is a taxon below subspecies.

I honestly think that poster believes that people of a different race from himself are not just a "subspecies," but a "sub-human subspecies."

 

[abu afak]

We haven't seen any new species due to natural selection in the last few hundred years, AFAIK.

that's because you, and most everyone else here, can't even basically google

observed speciation - Google Search

www.google.com

`

 

[abu afak]

And seen no speciation by natural selectio, right?

So it's all just guesswork.

WTF are you talking about 'species' you dumb creationist/I-D prIck.
As I said previously...,
Chimps and Gorillas have Two SPECIES each, as well as subspecies. (4 and 7or 8 respectively)
You are not in any way scientific, you FRAUD.
You'd view members of those different species (Chimps2) and (Gorillas2) as the Same 'Kind.' Same with 4 different Giraffe Species.

You're a Stealth Creationists/I-D clown with faux 'scientific' objection.
And you are the dumbest ever to try the trick.
So let's not hear this Fake use/misuse/Abuse of 'species' when you really mean 'Kind' you Dishonest little ******.

`

 

[abu afak]

A misconception that I had was that race and subspecies were equivalent.

As it happens, race is a taxon below subspecies.

Sometimes that can be correct but mostly not, and even less so Humans.
Most often race=subspecies.

Race (human classification) - Wikipedia (pre-PC- 2016-edit)
[.....]
"Morphologically differentiated populations

Traditionally, subspecies are seen as geographically isolated and genetically differentiated populations. That is, "the designation 'subspecies' is used to indicate an objective degree of microevolutionary divergence" One objection to this idea is that it does not specify what degree of differentiation is required. Therefore, any population that is somewhat biologically different could be considered a subspecies, even to the level of a local population. As a result, Templeton has argued that it is necessary to impose a threshold on the level of difference that is required for a population to be designated a subspecies.

This effectively means that populations of organisms must have reached a certain measurable level of difference to be recognised as subspecies. Dean Amadon proposed in 1949 that subspecies would be defined according to the 75% rule which means that 75% of a population must lie outside 99% of the range of other populations for a given defining morphological character or a set of characters. The 75% rule still has defenders but other scholars argue that it should be replaced with 90 or 95% rule.

In 1978, Sewall Wright suggested that human populations that have long inhabited separated parts of the world should, in general, be considered different subspecies by the USUAL criterion that most individuals of such populations can be allocated correctly by inspection.

Wright argued that
it does not require a trained anthropologist to classify an array of Englishmen, West Africans, and Chinese with 100% accuracy by features, skin color, and type of hair despite so much variability within Each of these groups that every individual can Easily be Distinguished from every other.

However, it is Customary to use the term Race Rather than Subspecies for the major subdivisions of the Human species as well as for minor ones.".."

`

 

[Old Rocks]

The people of America before European exploration were descendants of a large group of people who were isolated for ten to twenty thousand years. Those descendants spread over a large land mass, and founded civilizations including cities with up to five million in habitants. All without trade or any form of communication with people outside of the Americas. There were a wide variety of climate conditions over the large area and across the thousands of years. A perfect opportunity for Darwinian evolution to take place.

Yet, when Europeans landed in the Americas, they immediately began to copulate with natives and they produced large numbers of healthy and fertile offspring. In other words, in all those thousands of years, no human evolution had taken place. The Americans had their own languages, cultures, and superficial appearances, but their they were.

Still human. "After their kind," indeed.

But they were not that isolated. Polynesians had contact with the West Coast of both North and South America. There is the remains of a ship with amphora of the East Coast of South America. There is an Olmec head that looks like a Phoenician. Isolated contacts, yet enough to keep them in the general context of Homo Sapiens.