Your position is that something can be two species at once? I suppose that is one way to solve the problem of where to draw the line for speciation!
Completely out of line with the perspective of modern biology but fascinating and internally coherent none the less! It will take me years to fully digest this perspective. Thank you.
Saying that something can be two species at once is none the less not a compelling argument against the concept of a species being a social construct, as your perspective clashes with others’.
Your position is that something can be two species at once? I suppose that is one way to solve the problem of where to draw the line for speciation!
Completely out of line with the perspective of modern biology but fascinating and internally coherent none the less! It will take me years to fully digest this perspective. Thank you.
Saying that something can be two species at once is none the less not a compelling argument against the concept of a species being a social construct, as your perspective clashes with others’.
No, I’m saying two species can share a mutual subspecies…
I’m not sure if it makes more sense one way or the other, but obviously that’s a fundamental point you’d need to get before we move further.
But you keep down voting and being weirdly argumentative about this.
You do realize I gain absolutely nothing from helping you understand, right?
If you act like this, most people are just going to stop trying to teach you stuff
So what species is the sub species then under your framework?