The code that is DNA

[John 6IX Breezy]

Is there any particular reason that you feel compelled to revise your earlier acknowledgements, or can we continue?

I haven't made any revisions; I've been fairly consistent on the issues of your illustration. I point them out, make a note of where they are, and proceed. 

For example, you've made up a hypothetical test that can determine reproductive isolation between two genetic samples; is there some kind of dissimilarity threshold in genetics that allows us to know when such isolation occurs? Is there perhaps a unique chromosome that affects sexual reproduction exclusively that we can narrow our search just to that? If you think you can just look at genes, run a test on them, and figure out what they can or can't do, I'm afraid this discussion won't be possible. Take for example studies looking for a genetic component of homosexuality; these studies need to, first and foremost, gather people who are already homosexual and then look for any correlation in their genes. Why? Because that information doesn't just emerge from DNA; there isn't a miniature signpost that says, hey, I'm the gene for homosexuality, or hey, I'm the gene responsible for sexual isolation between these two samples. You need more than genes to draw these conclusions.

Likewise the species concept, there are different methods for defining the boundaries between species, each with its own set of advantages and disadvantages. If you're going to treat the biological species concept (the one that uses reproductive isolation) as if it were a matter-of-fact, set in stone definition of what a species, then I'm going to disagree with you. Every individual bacteria in a population of e. coli for example is reproductively isolated, obviously, since they're asexual.

So if you're walking me through your illustration from scratch, you have to address these things; and it doesn't seem like you are prepared for any nuances. But at this point it doesn't matter, you can proceed with your illustration.