If we selectively bred people with highest percentage of Neanderthal DNA over generations.

[Asclepias]

If we selectively bred people with the highest percentages of Neanderthal DNA, could we keep selecting for higher and higher percentages in order to re-create Neanderthals or at least people with much higher percentages over a long period of time?

Nope. You cant make a dog a wolf by breeding dogs that have a little wolf in them over and over again. All you will wind up with is a inbred dog with hip dysplasia

I think that you might be wrong, as all the Wolf DNA is still there, this would not just be breeding though, the dogs would need to survive in the wild where nature would kill all the weak as it always does.. Bye the way there is no such thing as dog DNA, as dogs are wolves, same DNA same species

No dogs are a subspecies of wolves. Dogs have slightly different DNA than wolves. Thats because dogs have been bred with other canines like foxes, coyotes, dholes, and jackals. Dogs are wolves closest relatives but there is some DNA difference. That DNA difference is what makes wolves wild. Most dogs have no clue how to survive in the wild and would starve to death without some human intervention before they learned. I used that analogy to make a point. Dogs and wolves are more similar than Neanderthals and humans. If you cant turn a dog population into wolves in terms of appearance, behavior etc then you could never recreate a neanderthal from say europeans that only have at most 4% neanderthal DNA.

Dogs are not a subspecies. They are genetically the same and as such can interbreed perfectly

Yes dogs are a subspecies of wolves. Homo sapiens and neanderthals could and did interbreed and they arent as closely related as dogs and wolves.

Dog Family: Facts About Canines & Their Cousins

"Canis lupus — wolf, gray wolf (Subspecies: Canis lupus familiaris — domestic dog)"

 

[Rosy]

If we selectively bred people with the highest percentages of Neanderthal DNA, could we keep selecting for higher and higher percentages in order to re-create Neanderthals or at least people with much higher percentages over a long period of time?

Nope. You cant make a dog a wolf by breeding dogs that have a little wolf in them over and over again. All you will wind up with is a inbred dog with hip dysplasia

I think that you might be wrong, as all the Wolf DNA is still there, this would not just be breeding though, the dogs would need to survive in the wild where nature would kill all the weak as it always does.. Bye the way there is no such thing as dog DNA, as dogs are wolves, same DNA same species

No dogs are a subspecies of wolves. Dogs have slightly different DNA than wolves. Thats because dogs have been bred with other canines like foxes, coyotes, dholes, and jackals. Dogs are wolves closest relatives but there is some DNA difference. That DNA difference is what makes wolves wild. Most dogs have no clue how to survive in the wild and would starve to death without some human intervention before they learned. I used that analogy to make a point. Dogs and wolves are more similar than Neanderthals and humans. If you cant turn a dog population into wolves in terms of appearance, behavior etc then you could never recreate a neanderthal from say europeans that only have at most 4% neanderthal DNA.

Dogs are not a subspecies. They are genetically the same and as such can interbreed perfectly

Yes dogs are a subspecies of wolves. Homo sapiens and neanderthals could and did interbreed and they arent as closely related as dogs and wolves.

Dogs are not a subspecies of wolves.

If this were true then wolf dog mixes would be sterile. They are fertile because they are genetically 98.99 percent identical and the same species.

I own 4 at the moment

https://www.quora.com/If-dogs-and-w...an-they-breed-and-still-have-viable-offspring

 

[Asclepias]

Nope. You cant make a dog a wolf by breeding dogs that have a little wolf in them over and over again. All you will wind up with is a inbred dog with hip dysplasia

I think that you might be wrong, as all the Wolf DNA is still there, this would not just be breeding though, the dogs would need to survive in the wild where nature would kill all the weak as it always does.. Bye the way there is no such thing as dog DNA, as dogs are wolves, same DNA same species

No dogs are a subspecies of wolves. Dogs have slightly different DNA than wolves. Thats because dogs have been bred with other canines like foxes, coyotes, dholes, and jackals. Dogs are wolves closest relatives but there is some DNA difference. That DNA difference is what makes wolves wild. Most dogs have no clue how to survive in the wild and would starve to death without some human intervention before they learned. I used that analogy to make a point. Dogs and wolves are more similar than Neanderthals and humans. If you cant turn a dog population into wolves in terms of appearance, behavior etc then you could never recreate a neanderthal from say europeans that only have at most 4% neanderthal DNA.

Dogs are not a subspecies. They are genetically the same and as such can interbreed perfectly

Yes dogs are a subspecies of wolves. Homo sapiens and neanderthals could and did interbreed and they arent as closely related as dogs and wolves.

Dogs are not a subspecies of wolves.

If this were true then wolf dog mixes would be sterile. They are fertile because they are genetically 98.99 percent identical and the same species.

I own 4 at the moment

https://www.quora.com/If-dogs-and-w...an-they-breed-and-still-have-viable-offspring

You dont sound very bright. Subspecies doesnt mean not the same species Why would a dog wolf mix be sterile? Dogs are a subspecies of wolf and as such they can breed and produce fertile offspring. I already posted the link that tells you dogs are a subspecies.

"Canis lupus — wolf, gray wolf (Subspecies: Canis lupus familiaris — domestic dog)"

Note that both designations say Canis Lupus. Dogs as a subspecies have the designation of familiaris added on. Your not good at this are you?

 

[Rosy]

I think that you might be wrong, as all the Wolf DNA is still there, this would not just be breeding though, the dogs would need to survive in the wild where nature would kill all the weak as it always does.. Bye the way there is no such thing as dog DNA, as dogs are wolves, same DNA same species

No dogs are a subspecies of wolves. Dogs have slightly different DNA than wolves. Thats because dogs have been bred with other canines like foxes, coyotes, dholes, and jackals. Dogs are wolves closest relatives but there is some DNA difference. That DNA difference is what makes wolves wild. Most dogs have no clue how to survive in the wild and would starve to death without some human intervention before they learned. I used that analogy to make a point. Dogs and wolves are more similar than Neanderthals and humans. If you cant turn a dog population into wolves in terms of appearance, behavior etc then you could never recreate a neanderthal from say europeans that only have at most 4% neanderthal DNA.

Dogs are not a subspecies. They are genetically the same and as such can interbreed perfectly

Yes dogs are a subspecies of wolves. Homo sapiens and neanderthals could and did interbreed and they arent as closely related as dogs and wolves.

Dogs are not a subspecies of wolves.

If this were true then wolf dog mixes would be sterile. They are fertile because they are genetically 98.99 percent identical and the same species.

I own 4 at the moment

https://www.quora.com/If-dogs-and-w...an-they-breed-and-still-have-viable-offspring

You dont sound very bright. Subspecies doesnt mean not the same species Why would a dog wolf mix be sterile? Dogs are a subspecies of wolf and as such they can breed and produce fertile offspring. I already posted the link that tells you dogs are a subspecies.

"Canis lupus — wolf, gray wolf (Subspecies: Canis lupus familiaris — domestic dog)"

Note that both designations say Canis Lupus. Dogs as a subspecies have the designation of familiaris added on. Your not good at this are you?

You are fully ignorant. If wolves and dogs were different species, the offspring would be sterile.

It's a fact and you dont like being wrong a horse and a donkey or a lion and tiger cross are all sterile because that is how genetics works. You are creating your own schizzo rules.

Now go peel the potatoes

 

[Asclepias]

No dogs are a subspecies of wolves. Dogs have slightly different DNA than wolves. Thats because dogs have been bred with other canines like foxes, coyotes, dholes, and jackals. Dogs are wolves closest relatives but there is some DNA difference. That DNA difference is what makes wolves wild. Most dogs have no clue how to survive in the wild and would starve to death without some human intervention before they learned. I used that analogy to make a point. Dogs and wolves are more similar than Neanderthals and humans. If you cant turn a dog population into wolves in terms of appearance, behavior etc then you could never recreate a neanderthal from say europeans that only have at most 4% neanderthal DNA.

Dogs are not a subspecies. They are genetically the same and as such can interbreed perfectly

Yes dogs are a subspecies of wolves. Homo sapiens and neanderthals could and did interbreed and they arent as closely related as dogs and wolves.

Dogs are not a subspecies of wolves.

If this were true then wolf dog mixes would be sterile. They are fertile because they are genetically 98.99 percent identical and the same species.

I own 4 at the moment

https://www.quora.com/If-dogs-and-w...an-they-breed-and-still-have-viable-offspring

You dont sound very bright. Subspecies doesnt mean not the same species Why would a dog wolf mix be sterile? Dogs are a subspecies of wolf and as such they can breed and produce fertile offspring. I already posted the link that tells you dogs are a subspecies.

"Canis lupus — wolf, gray wolf (Subspecies: Canis lupus familiaris — domestic dog)"

Note that both designations say Canis Lupus. Dogs as a subspecies have the designation of familiaris added on. Your not good at this are you?

You are fully ignorant. If wolves and dogs were different species, the offspring would be sterile.

It's a fact and you dont like being wrong a horse and a donkey or a lion and tiger cross are all sterile because that is how genetics works. You are creating your own schizzo rules.

Now go peel the potatoes

I didnt say they were completely different species dummy. I said dogs were subspecies. Do you understand what a subspecies is? I ask because you are either stupid or you are drunk.

 

[Rosy]

Dogs are not a subspecies. They are genetically the same and as such can interbreed perfectly

Yes dogs are a subspecies of wolves. Homo sapiens and neanderthals could and did interbreed and they arent as closely related as dogs and wolves.

Dogs are not a subspecies of wolves.

If this were true then wolf dog mixes would be sterile. They are fertile because they are genetically 98.99 percent identical and the same species.

I own 4 at the moment

https://www.quora.com/If-dogs-and-w...an-they-breed-and-still-have-viable-offspring

You dont sound very bright. Subspecies doesnt mean not the same species Why would a dog wolf mix be sterile? Dogs are a subspecies of wolf and as such they can breed and produce fertile offspring. I already posted the link that tells you dogs are a subspecies.

"Canis lupus — wolf, gray wolf (Subspecies: Canis lupus familiaris — domestic dog)"

Note that both designations say Canis Lupus. Dogs as a subspecies have the designation of familiaris added on. Your not good at this are you?

You are fully ignorant. If wolves and dogs were different species, the offspring would be sterile.

It's a fact and you dont like being wrong a horse and a donkey or a lion and tiger cross are all sterile because that is how genetics works. You are creating your own schizzo rules.

Now go peel the potatoes

I didnt say they were completely different species dummy. I said dogs were subspecies. Do you understand what a subspecies is? I ask because you are either stupid or you are drunk.

I just raised a litter of champion hunting dogs. Again under DNA analysis a dog and wolf are the same animal. Pug like mutants are born to wild wolves, but they can not live and the mother eats them to feed the normal pups. Only retarded humans keep the mutants alive accounting for every dog breed that is genetically a wolf


Did you finish the potatoes yet

130

 

[Asclepias]

Yes dogs are a subspecies of wolves. Homo sapiens and neanderthals could and did interbreed and they arent as closely related as dogs and wolves.

Dogs are not a subspecies of wolves.

If this were true then wolf dog mixes would be sterile. They are fertile because they are genetically 98.99 percent identical and the same species.

I own 4 at the moment

https://www.quora.com/If-dogs-and-w...an-they-breed-and-still-have-viable-offspring

You dont sound very bright. Subspecies doesnt mean not the same species Why would a dog wolf mix be sterile? Dogs are a subspecies of wolf and as such they can breed and produce fertile offspring. I already posted the link that tells you dogs are a subspecies.

"Canis lupus — wolf, gray wolf (Subspecies: Canis lupus familiaris — domestic dog)"

Note that both designations say Canis Lupus. Dogs as a subspecies have the designation of familiaris added on. Your not good at this are you?

You are fully ignorant. If wolves and dogs were different species, the offspring would be sterile.

It's a fact and you dont like being wrong a horse and a donkey or a lion and tiger cross are all sterile because that is how genetics works. You are creating your own schizzo rules.

Now go peel the potatoes

I didnt say they were completely different species dummy. I said dogs were subspecies. Do you understand what a subspecies is? I ask because you are either stupid or you are drunk.

I just raised a litter of champion hunting dogs. Again under DNA analysis a dog and wolf are the same animal. Pug like mutants are born to wild wolves, but they can not live and the mother eats them to feed the normal pups. Only retarded humans keep the mutants alive accounting for every dog breed that is genetically a wolf


Did you finish the potatoes yet

130

I dont care what you raised. That doesnt mean you know anything at all about science. Dogs are genetically a subspecies of wolf. Thats the main reason they have a different scientific name. Ask any wildlife biologist like the one I linked you to. hell you even admitted their DNA was not 100% the same.

Subspecies of Canis lupus

Canis lupus has 37 subspecies currently described, including the dingo, Canis lupus dingo, and the domestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris, and many subspecies of wolf throughout the Northern Hemisphere.

 

[HenryBHough]

I think a Democrat regime would more willingly fund breeding Neanderthals. It would make their recruiting so much easier. Fortunately they only think one (1) election ahead.

 

[Rosy]

Dogs are not a subspecies of wolves.

If this were true then wolf dog mixes would be sterile. They are fertile because they are genetically 98.99 percent identical and the same species.

I own 4 at the moment

https://www.quora.com/If-dogs-and-w...an-they-breed-and-still-have-viable-offspring

You dont sound very bright. Subspecies doesnt mean not the same species Why would a dog wolf mix be sterile? Dogs are a subspecies of wolf and as such they can breed and produce fertile offspring. I already posted the link that tells you dogs are a subspecies.

"Canis lupus — wolf, gray wolf (Subspecies: Canis lupus familiaris — domestic dog)"

Note that both designations say Canis Lupus. Dogs as a subspecies have the designation of familiaris added on. Your not good at this are you?

You are fully ignorant. If wolves and dogs were different species, the offspring would be sterile.

It's a fact and you dont like being wrong a horse and a donkey or a lion and tiger cross are all sterile because that is how genetics works. You are creating your own schizzo rules.

Now go peel the potatoes

I didnt say they were completely different species dummy. I said dogs were subspecies. Do you understand what a subspecies is? I ask because you are either stupid or you are drunk.

I just raised a litter of champion hunting dogs. Again under DNA analysis a dog and wolf are the same animal. Pug like mutants are born to wild wolves, but they can not live and the mother eats them to feed the normal pups. Only retarded humans keep the mutants alive accounting for every dog breed that is genetically a wolf


Did you finish the potatoes yet

130

I dont care what you raised. That doesnt mean you know anything at all about science. Dogs are genetically a subspecies of wolf. Thats the main reason they have a different scientific name. Ask any wildlife biologist like the one I linked you to. hell you even admitted their DNA was not 100% the same.

Subspecies of Canis lupus

Canis lupus has 37 subspecies currently described, including the dingo, Canis lupus dingo, and the domestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris, and many subspecies of wolf throughout the Northern Hemisphere.

I breed champion hunters, and I find you in a thread rebreeding Neanderthals. Lol, good luck

Again all dogs are created from mutated wolf DNA this makes them identical, just different looking. They are the same species

 

[Asclepias]

You dont sound very bright. Subspecies doesnt mean not the same species Why would a dog wolf mix be sterile? Dogs are a subspecies of wolf and as such they can breed and produce fertile offspring. I already posted the link that tells you dogs are a subspecies.

"Canis lupus — wolf, gray wolf (Subspecies: Canis lupus familiaris — domestic dog)"

Note that both designations say Canis Lupus. Dogs as a subspecies have the designation of familiaris added on. Your not good at this are you?

You are fully ignorant. If wolves and dogs were different species, the offspring would be sterile.

It's a fact and you dont like being wrong a horse and a donkey or a lion and tiger cross are all sterile because that is how genetics works. You are creating your own schizzo rules.

Now go peel the potatoes

I didnt say they were completely different species dummy. I said dogs were subspecies. Do you understand what a subspecies is? I ask because you are either stupid or you are drunk.

I just raised a litter of champion hunting dogs. Again under DNA analysis a dog and wolf are the same animal. Pug like mutants are born to wild wolves, but they can not live and the mother eats them to feed the normal pups. Only retarded humans keep the mutants alive accounting for every dog breed that is genetically a wolf


Did you finish the potatoes yet

130

I dont care what you raised. That doesnt mean you know anything at all about science. Dogs are genetically a subspecies of wolf. Thats the main reason they have a different scientific name. Ask any wildlife biologist like the one I linked you to. hell you even admitted their DNA was not 100% the same.

Subspecies of Canis lupus

Canis lupus has 37 subspecies currently described, including the dingo, Canis lupus dingo, and the domestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris, and many subspecies of wolf throughout the Northern Hemisphere.

I breed champion hunters, and I find you in a thread rebreeding Neanderthals. Lol, good luck

Again all dogs are created from mutated wolf DNA this makes them identical, just different looking. They are the same species

Not sure what breeding champion hunters has to do with anything.

You sound like an idiot. You do realize that the fact that the DNA is mutated means its not identical dont you?

mu·tate
/ˈmyo͞otāt/
verb

1. change or cause to change in form or nature.

 

[Rosy]

You are fully ignorant. If wolves and dogs were different species, the offspring would be sterile.

It's a fact and you dont like being wrong a horse and a donkey or a lion and tiger cross are all sterile because that is how genetics works. You are creating your own schizzo rules.

Now go peel the potatoes

I didnt say they were completely different species dummy. I said dogs were subspecies. Do you understand what a subspecies is? I ask because you are either stupid or you are drunk.

I just raised a litter of champion hunting dogs. Again under DNA analysis a dog and wolf are the same animal. Pug like mutants are born to wild wolves, but they can not live and the mother eats them to feed the normal pups. Only retarded humans keep the mutants alive accounting for every dog breed that is genetically a wolf


Did you finish the potatoes yet

130

I dont care what you raised. That doesnt mean you know anything at all about science. Dogs are genetically a subspecies of wolf. Thats the main reason they have a different scientific name. Ask any wildlife biologist like the one I linked you to. hell you even admitted their DNA was not 100% the same.

Subspecies of Canis lupus

Canis lupus has 37 subspecies currently described, including the dingo, Canis lupus dingo, and the domestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris, and many subspecies of wolf throughout the Northern Hemisphere.

I breed champion hunters, and I find you in a thread rebreeding Neanderthals. Lol, good luck

Again all dogs are created from mutated wolf DNA this makes them identical, just different looking. They are the same species

Not sure what breeding champion hunters has to do with anything.

You sound like an idiot. You do realize that the fact that the DNA is mutated means its not identical dont you?

mu·tate
/ˈmyo͞otāt/
verb

1. change or cause to change in form or nature.

Now you seem to be claiming that animals with mutations are subspecies. Kid, you are babbling at this point. Dogs and wolves are the same species, as odd as that may seem with a toy poodle and a grey wolf.

You have different DNA then a person from Norway or Japan the Congo or a native American Does this make you subspecies to them?

 

[Asclepias]

I didnt say they were completely different species dummy. I said dogs were subspecies. Do you understand what a subspecies is? I ask because you are either stupid or you are drunk.

I just raised a litter of champion hunting dogs. Again under DNA analysis a dog and wolf are the same animal. Pug like mutants are born to wild wolves, but they can not live and the mother eats them to feed the normal pups. Only retarded humans keep the mutants alive accounting for every dog breed that is genetically a wolf


Did you finish the potatoes yet

130

I dont care what you raised. That doesnt mean you know anything at all about science. Dogs are genetically a subspecies of wolf. Thats the main reason they have a different scientific name. Ask any wildlife biologist like the one I linked you to. hell you even admitted their DNA was not 100% the same.

Subspecies of Canis lupus

Canis lupus has 37 subspecies currently described, including the dingo, Canis lupus dingo, and the domestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris, and many subspecies of wolf throughout the Northern Hemisphere.

I breed champion hunters, and I find you in a thread rebreeding Neanderthals. Lol, good luck

Again all dogs are created from mutated wolf DNA this makes them identical, just different looking. They are the same species

Not sure what breeding champion hunters has to do with anything.

You sound like an idiot. You do realize that the fact that the DNA is mutated means its not identical dont you?

mu·tate
/ˈmyo͞otāt/
verb

1. change or cause to change in form or nature.

Now you seem to be claiming that animals with mutations are subspecies. Kid, you are babbling at this point. Dogs and wolves are the same species, as odd as that may seem with a toy poodle and a grey wolf.

You have different DNA then a person from Norway or Japan the Congo or a native American Does this make you subspecies to them?

Nope. I just pointed out you dont know what you are talking about. You are the one that said a mutation means the DNA is identical. You stepped on your own dick by saying that. Its not my fault you didnt know what "mutation" means.

 

[Rosy]

I just raised a litter of champion hunting dogs. Again under DNA analysis a dog and wolf are the same animal. Pug like mutants are born to wild wolves, but they can not live and the mother eats them to feed the normal pups. Only retarded humans keep the mutants alive accounting for every dog breed that is genetically a wolf


Did you finish the potatoes yet

130

I dont care what you raised. That doesnt mean you know anything at all about science. Dogs are genetically a subspecies of wolf. Thats the main reason they have a different scientific name. Ask any wildlife biologist like the one I linked you to. hell you even admitted their DNA was not 100% the same.

Subspecies of Canis lupus

Canis lupus has 37 subspecies currently described, including the dingo, Canis lupus dingo, and the domestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris, and many subspecies of wolf throughout the Northern Hemisphere.

I breed champion hunters, and I find you in a thread rebreeding Neanderthals. Lol, good luck

Again all dogs are created from mutated wolf DNA this makes them identical, just different looking. They are the same species

Not sure what breeding champion hunters has to do with anything.

You sound like an idiot. You do realize that the fact that the DNA is mutated means its not identical dont you?

mu·tate
/ˈmyo͞otāt/
verb

1. change or cause to change in form or nature.

Now you seem to be claiming that animals with mutations are subspecies. Kid, you are babbling at this point. Dogs and wolves are the same species, as odd as that may seem with a toy poodle and a grey wolf.

You have different DNA then a person from Norway or Japan the Congo or a native American Does this make you subspecies to them?

Nope. I just pointed out you dont know what you are talking about. You are the one that said a mutation means the DNA is identical. You stepped on your own dick by saying that. Its not my fault you didnt know what "mutation" means.

Dog owners might disagree, but as far as evolutionary biologists are concerned, all dogs are just dogs. It may seem odd that Canis (lupus) familiaris extends from rabbit-sized Chihuahuas to Great Danes which can be almost the size of a small pony, whereas seemingly much smaller differences place many animals into separate species or sub-species. One has to dig a bit into evolutionary theory for this to make sense.

The dog is a direct descendant of the grey wolf (Canis lupus), with evidence that lots of different wolves fed into the dog gene pool over the years. In the course of dog domestication, their behaviour, morphology and physique has changed, and differences among dog breeds are indeed astonishing. Imagine if future palaeontologists were to find Chihuahua remains in the fossil record: this animal would appear to have little in common with wolves.

But these differences among dog breeds – and between dogs and wolves – aren’t enough to warrant recognition as distinct species. Dogs are simply too young, from an evolutionary perspective.

It usually takes hundreds of thousands of years or more for mammals to evolve into distinct new species, requiring the slow accumulation of mutations that cause inheritable changes to its physical characteristics – or “phenotype”. Archaeological data and analysis of DNA from today’s dogs and wolves, as well as ancient remains, suggest that domestication started about 16,000-40,000 years ago, with most current dog breeds originating in the past 200 years.

We’ve sped up dog evolution – but not enough
Why dog breeds aren't considered separate species

How about this, you stick to breeding Neanderthals, and I will stick to breeding my shorthaired wolves

Here is one of my shorthaired wolves hunting
The modern wolf

 

[RandomPoster]

"The dog is a divergent subspecies of the gray wolf and was derived from a now-extinct population of Late Pleistocene wolves."

Subspecies of Canis lupus - Wikipedia

Saying it is a sub-species is saying they are the same species. For example, a donkey and a horse are two different species and the resultant hybrid is a sterile mule. The wolf and the dog are two different sub-species within the same species and can freely interbreed

Horse = Equus ferus
Donkey = Equus africanus asinus

Equus is the genus, whereas ferus is the species for horse and africanus asinus is the species for donkey.

Canis lupus occidentalis = North American Timber Wolf
Canis lupus familiaris = Domestic Dog

Canis is the genus. Lupus is the species. Occidentalis is the subspecies for Timber Wolf, whereas Familiaris is the subspecies for dog.

.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Dogs and wolves are both subspecies of the same species, Canis Lupus.

 

[Asclepias]

I dont care what you raised. That doesnt mean you know anything at all about science. Dogs are genetically a subspecies of wolf. Thats the main reason they have a different scientific name. Ask any wildlife biologist like the one I linked you to. hell you even admitted their DNA was not 100% the same.

Subspecies of Canis lupus

Canis lupus has 37 subspecies currently described, including the dingo, Canis lupus dingo, and the domestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris, and many subspecies of wolf throughout the Northern Hemisphere.

I breed champion hunters, and I find you in a thread rebreeding Neanderthals. Lol, good luck

Again all dogs are created from mutated wolf DNA this makes them identical, just different looking. They are the same species

Not sure what breeding champion hunters has to do with anything.

You sound like an idiot. You do realize that the fact that the DNA is mutated means its not identical dont you?

mu·tate
/ˈmyo͞otāt/
verb

1. change or cause to change in form or nature.

Now you seem to be claiming that animals with mutations are subspecies. Kid, you are babbling at this point. Dogs and wolves are the same species, as odd as that may seem with a toy poodle and a grey wolf.

You have different DNA then a person from Norway or Japan the Congo or a native American Does this make you subspecies to them?

Nope. I just pointed out you dont know what you are talking about. You are the one that said a mutation means the DNA is identical. You stepped on your own dick by saying that. Its not my fault you didnt know what "mutation" means.

Dog owners might disagree, but as far as evolutionary biologists are concerned, all dogs are just dogs. It may seem odd that Canis (lupus) familiaris extends from rabbit-sized Chihuahuas to Great Danes which can be almost the size of a small pony, whereas seemingly much smaller differences place many animals into separate species or sub-species. One has to dig a bit into evolutionary theory for this to make sense.

The dog is a direct descendant of the grey wolf (Canis lupus), with evidence that lots of different wolves fed into the dog gene pool over the years. In the course of dog domestication, their behaviour, morphology and physique has changed, and differences among dog breeds are indeed astonishing. Imagine if future palaeontologists were to find Chihuahua remains in the fossil record: this animal would appear to have little in common with wolves.

But these differences among dog breeds – and between dogs and wolves – aren’t enough to warrant recognition as distinct species. Dogs are simply too young, from an evolutionary perspective.

It usually takes hundreds of thousands of years or more for mammals to evolve into distinct new species, requiring the slow accumulation of mutations that cause inheritable changes to its physical characteristics – or “phenotype”. Archaeological data and analysis of DNA from today’s dogs and wolves, as well as ancient remains, suggest that domestication started about 16,000-40,000 years ago, with most current dog breeds originating in the past 200 years.

We’ve sped up dog evolution – but not enough
Why dog breeds aren't considered separate species

How about this, you stick to breeding Neanderthals, and I will stick to breeding my shorthaired wolves

Here is one of my shorthaired wolves hunting
The modern wolf

Your dogs are not wolves. If they were wolves they would look like wolves. There is a reason you cant breed 2 wolves together and get a basset hound or vice versa.

 

[RandomPoster]

I breed champion hunters, and I find you in a thread rebreeding Neanderthals. Lol, good luck

Again all dogs are created from mutated wolf DNA this makes them identical, just different looking. They are the same species

Not sure what breeding champion hunters has to do with anything.

You sound like an idiot. You do realize that the fact that the DNA is mutated means its not identical dont you?

mu·tate
/ˈmyo͞otāt/
verb

1. change or cause to change in form or nature.

Now you seem to be claiming that animals with mutations are subspecies. Kid, you are babbling at this point. Dogs and wolves are the same species, as odd as that may seem with a toy poodle and a grey wolf.

You have different DNA then a person from Norway or Japan the Congo or a native American Does this make you subspecies to them?

Nope. I just pointed out you dont know what you are talking about. You are the one that said a mutation means the DNA is identical. You stepped on your own dick by saying that. Its not my fault you didnt know what "mutation" means.

Dog owners might disagree, but as far as evolutionary biologists are concerned, all dogs are just dogs. It may seem odd that Canis (lupus) familiaris extends from rabbit-sized Chihuahuas to Great Danes which can be almost the size of a small pony, whereas seemingly much smaller differences place many animals into separate species or sub-species. One has to dig a bit into evolutionary theory for this to make sense.

The dog is a direct descendant of the grey wolf (Canis lupus), with evidence that lots of different wolves fed into the dog gene pool over the years. In the course of dog domestication, their behaviour, morphology and physique has changed, and differences among dog breeds are indeed astonishing. Imagine if future palaeontologists were to find Chihuahua remains in the fossil record: this animal would appear to have little in common with wolves.

But these differences among dog breeds – and between dogs and wolves – aren’t enough to warrant recognition as distinct species. Dogs are simply too young, from an evolutionary perspective.

It usually takes hundreds of thousands of years or more for mammals to evolve into distinct new species, requiring the slow accumulation of mutations that cause inheritable changes to its physical characteristics – or “phenotype”. Archaeological data and analysis of DNA from today’s dogs and wolves, as well as ancient remains, suggest that domestication started about 16,000-40,000 years ago, with most current dog breeds originating in the past 200 years.

We’ve sped up dog evolution – but not enough
Why dog breeds aren't considered separate species

How about this, you stick to breeding Neanderthals, and I will stick to breeding my shorthaired wolves

Here is one of my shorthaired wolves hunting
The modern wolf

Your dogs are not wolves. If they were wolves they would look like wolves. There is a reason you cant breed 2 wolves together and get a basset hound or vice versa.

The reason you can't breed two wolves together and get a basset hound is the same reason you can't breed two Labrador Retrievers together and get a basset hound.

 

[Asclepias]

Not sure what breeding champion hunters has to do with anything.

You sound like an idiot. You do realize that the fact that the DNA is mutated means its not identical dont you?

mu·tate
/ˈmyo͞otāt/
verb

1. change or cause to change in form or nature.

Now you seem to be claiming that animals with mutations are subspecies. Kid, you are babbling at this point. Dogs and wolves are the same species, as odd as that may seem with a toy poodle and a grey wolf.

You have different DNA then a person from Norway or Japan the Congo or a native American Does this make you subspecies to them?

Nope. I just pointed out you dont know what you are talking about. You are the one that said a mutation means the DNA is identical. You stepped on your own dick by saying that. Its not my fault you didnt know what "mutation" means.

Dog owners might disagree, but as far as evolutionary biologists are concerned, all dogs are just dogs. It may seem odd that Canis (lupus) familiaris extends from rabbit-sized Chihuahuas to Great Danes which can be almost the size of a small pony, whereas seemingly much smaller differences place many animals into separate species or sub-species. One has to dig a bit into evolutionary theory for this to make sense.

The dog is a direct descendant of the grey wolf (Canis lupus), with evidence that lots of different wolves fed into the dog gene pool over the years. In the course of dog domestication, their behaviour, morphology and physique has changed, and differences among dog breeds are indeed astonishing. Imagine if future palaeontologists were to find Chihuahua remains in the fossil record: this animal would appear to have little in common with wolves.

But these differences among dog breeds – and between dogs and wolves – aren’t enough to warrant recognition as distinct species. Dogs are simply too young, from an evolutionary perspective.

It usually takes hundreds of thousands of years or more for mammals to evolve into distinct new species, requiring the slow accumulation of mutations that cause inheritable changes to its physical characteristics – or “phenotype”. Archaeological data and analysis of DNA from today’s dogs and wolves, as well as ancient remains, suggest that domestication started about 16,000-40,000 years ago, with most current dog breeds originating in the past 200 years.

We’ve sped up dog evolution – but not enough
Why dog breeds aren't considered separate species

How about this, you stick to breeding Neanderthals, and I will stick to breeding my shorthaired wolves

Here is one of my shorthaired wolves hunting
The modern wolf

Your dogs are not wolves. If they were wolves they would look like wolves. There is a reason you cant breed 2 wolves together and get a basset hound or vice versa.

The reason you can't breed two wolves together and get a basset hound is the same reason you can't breed two Labrador Retrievers together and get a basset hound.

Correct. Different DNA which proves my point. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[RandomPoster]

Now you seem to be claiming that animals with mutations are subspecies. Kid, you are babbling at this point. Dogs and wolves are the same species, as odd as that may seem with a toy poodle and a grey wolf.

You have different DNA then a person from Norway or Japan the Congo or a native American Does this make you subspecies to them?

Nope. I just pointed out you dont know what you are talking about. You are the one that said a mutation means the DNA is identical. You stepped on your own dick by saying that. Its not my fault you didnt know what "mutation" means.

Dog owners might disagree, but as far as evolutionary biologists are concerned, all dogs are just dogs. It may seem odd that Canis (lupus) familiaris extends from rabbit-sized Chihuahuas to Great Danes which can be almost the size of a small pony, whereas seemingly much smaller differences place many animals into separate species or sub-species. One has to dig a bit into evolutionary theory for this to make sense.

The dog is a direct descendant of the grey wolf (Canis lupus), with evidence that lots of different wolves fed into the dog gene pool over the years. In the course of dog domestication, their behaviour, morphology and physique has changed, and differences among dog breeds are indeed astonishing. Imagine if future palaeontologists were to find Chihuahua remains in the fossil record: this animal would appear to have little in common with wolves.

But these differences among dog breeds – and between dogs and wolves – aren’t enough to warrant recognition as distinct species. Dogs are simply too young, from an evolutionary perspective.

It usually takes hundreds of thousands of years or more for mammals to evolve into distinct new species, requiring the slow accumulation of mutations that cause inheritable changes to its physical characteristics – or “phenotype”. Archaeological data and analysis of DNA from today’s dogs and wolves, as well as ancient remains, suggest that domestication started about 16,000-40,000 years ago, with most current dog breeds originating in the past 200 years.

We’ve sped up dog evolution – but not enough
Why dog breeds aren't considered separate species

How about this, you stick to breeding Neanderthals, and I will stick to breeding my shorthaired wolves

Here is one of my shorthaired wolves hunting
The modern wolf

Your dogs are not wolves. If they were wolves they would look like wolves. There is a reason you cant breed 2 wolves together and get a basset hound or vice versa.

The reason you can't breed two wolves together and get a basset hound is the same reason you can't breed two Labrador Retrievers together and get a basset hound.

Correct. Different DNA which proves my point. Thanks for pointing that out.

So, are Labrador Retrievers and Basset Hounds different species?

 

[miketx]

Another fact many overlook as that liberals for some reason cannot see how they are destroying themselves.