Hi Bioflex,
There is a recurring point in your posts that I'd like to clear up.
that is the ONLY way the process of evolution can continue - INTERBREEDING
You have stated this several times and not supported it. It is not correct. Here are a couple of considerations
1. Way down the bottom of the evolutionary tree - or shrubs - are one celled critters and viruses. No males and females. No interbreeding as you understand it, but still, DNA exchange and influencing.
2. You are correct that when two dogs mate, the offspring will be dogs. However. If a viable population of dogs were isolated in a different environment from other dogs, different climate, food, predators, the features that help their survival will become more dominant. Over hundreds of thousands of years, selection would continue to refine these features. The chromosome count could change over time, as well as scent, vocalisation etc (as NC has observed). If the isolation ended, they might look and behave so unlike dogs, that we'd call then something else (eg not-dogs, foxes, whatever). They might no longer be able to mate with dogs, let alone produce viable, fertile offspring.
They would be a new species, one which looks, sounds, different from dogs. The common heritage, however, would still be traceable. The name "dog" is an artificial designator, and might well not be applied to the not-dog.
So, evolution is not just interbreeding. It is random change and natural selection (ie those best fitted to their environment produce more offspring). And it takes a very long time.
And yes, there is very probably more to it than that. But that much has never been falsified.
Hope that help to clarify the issue. Retro