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

[Asclepias]

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?

Who said they were? We are talking about DNA. See the OP and my responses to Rosy on the subject of dogs DNA being different from wolf DNA.

 

[RandomPoster]

You said. "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."

His dogs may not look wolves, except they are the same species. Dogs are a sub-species of wolf.

The fact that breeding wolves produces doesn't produce two basset hounds does not change this. The fact that breeding two Labrador Retrievers together does not produce a basset hound does not change the fact that the Labrador Retriever and the Basset hound are the same species anymore than the fact that you can't breed two wolves together and get a basset hound.

Why dog breeds aren't considered separate species

"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."

"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."

 

[Asclepias]

You said. "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."

His dogs may not look wolves, except they are the same species. Dogs are a sub-species of wolf.

The fact that breeding wolves produces doesn't produce two basset hounds does not change this. The fact that breeding two Labrador Retrievers together does not produce a basset hound does not change the fact that the Labrador Retriever and the Basset hound are the same species anymore than the fact that you can't breed two wolves together and get a basset hound.

Why dog breeds aren't considered separate species

"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."

"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."

Yes thats what I said. If you note I didnt didnt include the word species in that statement. You seem to have problems with reading comprehension. None of that has anything to do with my point. They have different DNA hence you cant breed two dogs with a little wolf in them and get a wolf.

And again dogs and wolves are not the same species. Dogs are a sub species. They make that distinction for a reason. There is an observable difference.

 

[RandomPoster]

You said. "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."

His dogs may not look wolves, except they are the same species. Dogs are a sub-species of wolf.

The fact that breeding wolves produces doesn't produce two basset hounds does not change this. The fact that breeding two Labrador Retrievers together does not produce a basset hound does not change the fact that the Labrador Retriever and the Basset hound are the same species anymore than the fact that you can't breed two wolves together and get a basset hound.

Why dog breeds aren't considered separate species

"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."

"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."

Yes thats what I said. If you note I didnt didnt include the word species in that statement. You seem to have problems with reading comprehension. None of that has anything to do with my point. They have different DNA hence you cant breed two dogs with a little wolf in them and get a wolf.

And again dogs and wolves are not the same species. Dogs are a sub species. They make that distinction for a reason. There is an observable difference.

Yes, like I said wolves are Canis Lupus and dogs are Canis Lupus Familiaris. They are two different sub-species within the same species.
.

 

[Asclepias]

You said. "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."

His dogs may not look wolves, except they are the same species. Dogs are a sub-species of wolf.

The fact that breeding wolves produces doesn't produce two basset hounds does not change this. The fact that breeding two Labrador Retrievers together does not produce a basset hound does not change the fact that the Labrador Retriever and the Basset hound are the same species anymore than the fact that you can't breed two wolves together and get a basset hound.

Why dog breeds aren't considered separate species

"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."

"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."

Yes thats what I said. If you note I didnt didnt include the word species in that statement. You seem to have problems with reading comprehension. None of that has anything to do with my point. They have different DNA hence you cant breed two dogs with a little wolf in them and get a wolf.

And again dogs and wolves are not the same species. Dogs are a sub species. They make that distinction for a reason. There is an observable difference.

Yes, like I said wolves are Canis Lupus and dogs are Canis Lupus Familiaris. They are two different sub-species within the same species.
.

Yeah but that doesnt change the point. The point is that dogs have different DNA from wolves which is why you cant get a wolf from breeding two dogs with a little wolf DNA in them.

 

[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.

A mutation good bad or neutral does not create a subspecies. You seem to be quite racist

 

[Rosy]

You said. "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."

His dogs may not look wolves, except they are the same species. Dogs are a sub-species of wolf.

The fact that breeding wolves produces doesn't produce two basset hounds does not change this. The fact that breeding two Labrador Retrievers together does not produce a basset hound does not change the fact that the Labrador Retriever and the Basset hound are the same species anymore than the fact that you can't breed two wolves together and get a basset hound.

Why dog breeds aren't considered separate species

"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."

"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."

Yes thats what I said. If you note I didnt didnt include the word species in that statement. You seem to have problems with reading comprehension. None of that has anything to do with my point. They have different DNA hence you cant breed two dogs with a little wolf in them and get a wolf.

And again dogs and wolves are not the same species. Dogs are a sub species. They make that distinction for a reason. There is an observable difference.

Yes, like I said wolves are Canis Lupus and dogs are Canis Lupus Familiaris. They are two different sub-species within the same species.
.

No dog understands this, which is required for them to breed with the selected member of the subspecies group. Conclusion, dogs are wolves

 

[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.

A mutation good bad or neutral does not create a subspecies. You seem to be quite racist

Who said a mutation creates a subspecies? White people are the result of a mutation and they are still homo sapiens. Its amusing that you are trying to deflect to draw attention away from you being too stupid to know that a mutation is a change in DNA and therefore is different from the DNA it was previously.

 

[Asclepias]

You said. "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."

His dogs may not look wolves, except they are the same species. Dogs are a sub-species of wolf.

The fact that breeding wolves produces doesn't produce two basset hounds does not change this. The fact that breeding two Labrador Retrievers together does not produce a basset hound does not change the fact that the Labrador Retriever and the Basset hound are the same species anymore than the fact that you can't breed two wolves together and get a basset hound.

Why dog breeds aren't considered separate species

"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."

"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."

Yes thats what I said. If you note I didnt didnt include the word species in that statement. You seem to have problems with reading comprehension. None of that has anything to do with my point. They have different DNA hence you cant breed two dogs with a little wolf in them and get a wolf.

And again dogs and wolves are not the same species. Dogs are a sub species. They make that distinction for a reason. There is an observable difference.

Yes, like I said wolves are Canis Lupus and dogs are Canis Lupus Familiaris. They are two different sub-species within the same species.
.

No dog understands this, which is required for them to breed with the selected member of the subspecies group. Conclusion, dogs are wolves

No dogs are not wolfs and if you even have had dog/wolf mixes like you claimed you would instantly know that. Dogs and wolves are vastly different in temperament and behavior. A wolf is a wild animal which is why its illegal to own one in most areas of the US.

 

[Rosy]

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.

A mutation good bad or neutral does not create a subspecies. You seem to be quite racist

Who said a mutation creates a subspecies? White people are the result of a mutation and they are still homo sapiens. Its amusing that you are trying to deflect to draw attention away from you being too stupid to know that a mutation is a change in DNA and therefore is different from the DNA it was previously.

Retard, I said that dog mutations do not make them a subspecies

 

[Rosy]

You said. "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."

His dogs may not look wolves, except they are the same species. Dogs are a sub-species of wolf.

The fact that breeding wolves produces doesn't produce two basset hounds does not change this. The fact that breeding two Labrador Retrievers together does not produce a basset hound does not change the fact that the Labrador Retriever and the Basset hound are the same species anymore than the fact that you can't breed two wolves together and get a basset hound.

Why dog breeds aren't considered separate species

"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."

"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."

Yes thats what I said. If you note I didnt didnt include the word species in that statement. You seem to have problems with reading comprehension. None of that has anything to do with my point. They have different DNA hence you cant breed two dogs with a little wolf in them and get a wolf.

And again dogs and wolves are not the same species. Dogs are a sub species. They make that distinction for a reason. There is an observable difference.

Yes, like I said wolves are Canis Lupus and dogs are Canis Lupus Familiaris. They are two different sub-species within the same species.
.

No dog understands this, which is required for them to breed with the selected member of the subspecies group. Conclusion, dogs are wolves

No dogs are not wolfs and if you even have had dog/wolf mixes like you claimed you would instantly know that. Dogs and wolves are vastly different in temperament and behavior. A wolf is a wild animal which is why its illegal to own one in most areas of the US.

Okeedokee

 

[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.

A mutation good bad or neutral does not create a subspecies. You seem to be quite racist

Who said a mutation creates a subspecies? White people are the result of a mutation and they are still homo sapiens. Its amusing that you are trying to deflect to draw attention away from you being too stupid to know that a mutation is a change in DNA and therefore is different from the DNA it was previously.

Retard, I said that dog mutations do not make them a subspecies

No retard. You said the DNA was identical even after you admitted it wasnt.

"Again all dogs are created from mutated wolf DNA this makes them identical"

If its mutated how are wolves and dogs identical dummy? if they are identical why cant you breed two basset hounds and get a wolf cub?

 

[Rosy]

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.

A mutation good bad or neutral does not create a subspecies. You seem to be quite racist

Who said a mutation creates a subspecies? White people are the result of a mutation and they are still homo sapiens. Its amusing that you are trying to deflect to draw attention away from you being too stupid to know that a mutation is a change in DNA and therefore is different from the DNA it was previously.

Retard, I said that dog mutations do not make them a subspecies

No retard. You said the DNA was identical even after you admitted it wasnt.

"Again all dogs are created from mutated wolf DNA this makes them identical"

If its mutated how are wolves and dogs identical dummy? if they are identical why cant you breed two basset hounds and get a wolf cub?

Dog and Wolf DNA is identical...……..

Silly girl

 

[Asclepias]

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.

A mutation good bad or neutral does not create a subspecies. You seem to be quite racist

Who said a mutation creates a subspecies? White people are the result of a mutation and they are still homo sapiens. Its amusing that you are trying to deflect to draw attention away from you being too stupid to know that a mutation is a change in DNA and therefore is different from the DNA it was previously.

Retard, I said that dog mutations do not make them a subspecies

No retard. You said the DNA was identical even after you admitted it wasnt.

"Again all dogs are created from mutated wolf DNA this makes them identical"

If its mutated how are wolves and dogs identical dummy? if they are identical why cant you breed two basset hounds and get a wolf cub?

Dog and Wolf DNA is identical...……..

Silly girl

No stupid. Its not identical. If it was identical you wouldnt be able to tell their DNA apart.

 

[fncceo]

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?

I think it's already been done.

You do know that Neandertals brains were larger than Homo Sapiens ?

Size isn't everything. The prefrontal cortex is what counts.

That's just something men with small brains say to make themselves feel better.

 

[Rosy]

A mutation good bad or neutral does not create a subspecies. You seem to be quite racist

Who said a mutation creates a subspecies? White people are the result of a mutation and they are still homo sapiens. Its amusing that you are trying to deflect to draw attention away from you being too stupid to know that a mutation is a change in DNA and therefore is different from the DNA it was previously.

Retard, I said that dog mutations do not make them a subspecies

No retard. You said the DNA was identical even after you admitted it wasnt.

"Again all dogs are created from mutated wolf DNA this makes them identical"

If its mutated how are wolves and dogs identical dummy? if they are identical why cant you breed two basset hounds and get a wolf cub?

Dog and Wolf DNA is identical...……..

Silly girl

No stupid. Its not identical. If it was identical you wouldnt be able to tell their DNA apart.

Under DNA screening every dog appears to be a wolf.

You silly girl

 

[fncceo]

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.

A mutation good bad or neutral does not create a subspecies. You seem to be quite racist

Who said a mutation creates a subspecies? White people are the result of a mutation and they are still homo sapiens. Its amusing that you are trying to deflect to draw attention away from you being too stupid to know that a mutation is a change in DNA and therefore is different from the DNA it was previously.

Retard, I said that dog mutations do not make them a subspecies

No retard. You said the DNA was identical even after you admitted it wasnt.

"Again all dogs are created from mutated wolf DNA this makes them identical"

If its mutated how are wolves and dogs identical dummy? if they are identical why cant you breed two basset hounds and get a wolf cub?

Dog and Wolf DNA is identical...……..

Silly girl

Only identical twins have identical DNA.

 

[Asclepias]

A mutation good bad or neutral does not create a subspecies. You seem to be quite racist

Who said a mutation creates a subspecies? White people are the result of a mutation and they are still homo sapiens. Its amusing that you are trying to deflect to draw attention away from you being too stupid to know that a mutation is a change in DNA and therefore is different from the DNA it was previously.

Retard, I said that dog mutations do not make them a subspecies

No retard. You said the DNA was identical even after you admitted it wasnt.

"Again all dogs are created from mutated wolf DNA this makes them identical"

If its mutated how are wolves and dogs identical dummy? if they are identical why cant you breed two basset hounds and get a wolf cub?

Dog and Wolf DNA is identical...……..

Silly girl

Only identical twins have identical DNA.

Even they dont have identical DNA. Epigenetic changes that occur after the egg split account for these differences in most cases.

The Claim: Identical Twins Have Identical DNA

 

[fncceo]

Who said a mutation creates a subspecies? White people are the result of a mutation and they are still homo sapiens. Its amusing that you are trying to deflect to draw attention away from you being too stupid to know that a mutation is a change in DNA and therefore is different from the DNA it was previously.

Retard, I said that dog mutations do not make them a subspecies

No retard. You said the DNA was identical even after you admitted it wasnt.

"Again all dogs are created from mutated wolf DNA this makes them identical"

If its mutated how are wolves and dogs identical dummy? if they are identical why cant you breed two basset hounds and get a wolf cub?

Dog and Wolf DNA is identical...……..

Silly girl

Only identical twins have identical DNA.

Even they dont have identical DNA. Epigenetic changes that occur after the egg split account for these differences in most cases.

The Claim: Identical Twins Have Identical DNA

True, in utero is the closest to identical that DNA can be.

 

[Asclepias]

Who said a mutation creates a subspecies? White people are the result of a mutation and they are still homo sapiens. Its amusing that you are trying to deflect to draw attention away from you being too stupid to know that a mutation is a change in DNA and therefore is different from the DNA it was previously.

Retard, I said that dog mutations do not make them a subspecies

No retard. You said the DNA was identical even after you admitted it wasnt.

"Again all dogs are created from mutated wolf DNA this makes them identical"

If its mutated how are wolves and dogs identical dummy? if they are identical why cant you breed two basset hounds and get a wolf cub?

Dog and Wolf DNA is identical...……..

Silly girl

No stupid. Its not identical. If it was identical you wouldnt be able to tell their DNA apart.

Under DNA screening every dog appears to be a wolf.

You silly girl

No dummy. Under DNA screening you can even tell a pitbull from a collie. Damn youre stupid or ignorant. Maybe both

30 Fascinating Differences Between Wolves and Dogs - Dog Discoveries

The large animal is a wolf. The smaller a dog.