Are the numerous dog breeds proof of evolution?

[sealybobo]

Opinion based on?

Well, I have read the Bible. Pretty gross, but interesting nonetheless. A peek into the primitive morality and ethics of ancient people, and their first and worst attempt to compile them.

Why did you just lie?
At least post 20 or 30 times before you lie.
If you have read the story, in context of the flood, you're not very bright.
The morality of 2021 is not much better but God promised Noach He would never again destroy almost all of mankind in a flood.

Meaningless rant. But thanks. To be continued in another thread and section of the board.

I agree; everything you post is a meaningless rant.

Cool.

You do know the silly Noah flood myth never happened, right?

Prove it.

Malbim - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

He was a respected scientist among secularists who says it happened and wrote an entire explanation of how.
How many times do I have to make you look stupid?

Prove it how? What would proof be, to you? Apparently the information that has convinced me and the global scientific community doesnt convince you. So then, what would be proof, to you?

Remember, i am not just proving it. Many people are convinced. I am being asked to prove ot to you.

So, what would be proof?

Yet scientists not on the payroll of universities disagree.
Neither one of is proving anything because neither one of us is a scientist.

Your scientists not on the university payroll are on someone's payroll. Usually a lobbyist willing to deny things like global warming or that cigarettes cause cancer or that led is bad for us.

Your scientists don't have scientific consensus. Your theories have not gone through the scientific process. They haven't been peer reviewed. If they are it suddenly gets debunked. And that's when you accuse the entire scientific community of lying rather than the one conservative lobbyist scientist the GOP was able to find.

 

[sealybobo]

I’m asking. If we could make a border collie the smartest dog in a couple hundred years, smarter than other breeds of dogs, could we have held blacks back by not allowing them to learn for 400 years?

And that is because we took the "smartest" two dogs from two litters and bred them. Then did it again 100s of times. That is not analogous to what you are describing.

So, by what mechanism?

One could make an argument that by disallowing and de-emphasizing the need for intelligence and education in the black community, society thereby set up a culture which devalues both characteristics, so that the community's members then selectively bred away from those traits.

However, that wouldn't explain why, during the decades between emancipation and the civil rights upheaval of the 1960s, the black community itself valued and strove for the ability to be educated the same as whites.

Probably why my theory that our brains are more evolved isn't true. Or it's so miniscule that it's not even measurable.

And don't put too much emphasis on that time period. During that time we gave them inferior teachers, books, schools with no heat or air. I went to a Detroit Public School. To this day they don't compare with Metro Detroit Public schools. So from the end of slavery, blacks have been given an inferior education. Add that to the 400 years we didn't allow them to read. I think that 400 year time is more important than the era you are talking about don't you?

 

[zaangalewa]

I don't have a science background and don't know much about evolution but I believe the answer to my question is YES. What say you? Here's an article that delves into the topic.

From Wolves to Pugs and Great Danes – The History of Dog Breeds

Updated October 24, 2024 – Learn about the evolution of dogs and how they went from wolves to the loving pets we keep in our homes.

www.morrisanimalfoundation.org

Yes - you are right. We use "evolution" since thousands of years and call it "selective breeding" for example. We saw thousands of years ago what nature is doing and copied this system for our own use. Our dogs fit to the world which we created.

The difference between this what we are doing and what mother nature is doing is clear if we suddenly would disappear and left back alone our dogs. Which dogs would fit into this new world? For sure not the maltese dogs for example. Maltese have problems with their size, their teeth, their legs and their natural coat - if they would know how to hunt, to kill and to eat at all. They would not "fit". And in case of the Maltese would not happen any "adaptation". They all would die out. No way to survive. Nevertheless some few dogs form other dog races could fit to this new natural world and could be able to survive.

Oh by the way - not to forget: In our world here Maltese dogs are very important lovely dogs. The word "Maltese" means somehow that this dogs have to do with harbors. How this fits? Who knows?

 

[zaangalewa]

I don't have a science background and don't know much about evolution but I believe the answer to my question is YES. What say you? Here's an article that delves into the topic.

From Wolves to Pugs and Great Danes – The History of Dog Breeds

Updated October 24, 2024 – Learn about the evolution of dogs and how they went from wolves to the loving pets we keep in our homes.

www.morrisanimalfoundation.org

Nope.. Its a result of selective breeding.

Nope? ... No hope? ... Absolutelly wrong?

Where do you see the difference between "selective breeding" and "natural selection"? We use the natural law evolution since about 20,000 years when some wolves decided to make us responsible for their lifes. Looks like we made not a bad job for them.

 

[Dusty]

I don't have a science background and don't know much about evolution but I believe the answer to my question is YES. What say you? Here's an article that delves into the topic.

From Wolves to Pugs and Great Danes – The History of Dog Breeds

Updated October 24, 2024 – Learn about the evolution of dogs and how they went from wolves to the loving pets we keep in our homes.

www.morrisanimalfoundation.org

Nope.. Its a result of selective breeding.

Nope? ... No hope? ... Absolutelly wrong?

Where do you see the difference between "selective breeding" and "natural selection"? We use the natural law evolution since about 20,000 years when some wolves decided to make us responsible for their lifes. Looks like we made not a bad job for them.

Dogs are not evolved from wolves as they are both still the same species, the dog however is actually been partly de-evolved and is now a parasite living off of humans

 

[zaangalewa]

If you took a dog and put it in an isolated place where life was continually difficult but not impossible for several million years what you would end up with would not be a dog.

Why? If it fits it survives - if it not fits it dies out. So if the dogs are able to survive they will always be able to survive as long as the world around keeps relativelly constant. You can see this very good when the aliens from Xerenos IV had let free their crocies some hundred million years ago on planet Earth. Crocodiles still exist since this days.

They would adapt to their environment.

No. They fit or they die out - that's "adaptation".

Of course evolution is a real thing because adaptation is an observable phenomena.

But the word is not very good. It gives in my owm language always a feeling as if an adaptation would be something like a process of learning. But it is not. Adaptation is a very brutal thing. You attack a bee - the bee kills you - your species adapts: one more allergy sufferer less.

The origin of life itself is almost a separate question. We still don't have a good answer to how the first living cell came to be. After that it's settled science.

 

[zaangalewa]

I don't have a science background and don't know much about evolution but I believe the answer to my question is YES. What say you? Here's an article that delves into the topic.

From Wolves to Pugs and Great Danes – The History of Dog Breeds

Updated October 24, 2024 – Learn about the evolution of dogs and how they went from wolves to the loving pets we keep in our homes.

www.morrisanimalfoundation.org

Nope.. Its a result of selective breeding.

Nope? ... No hope? ... Absolutelly wrong?

Where do you see the difference between "selective breeding" and "natural selection"? We use the natural law evolution since about 20,000 years when some wolves decided to make us responsible for their lifes. Looks like we made not a bad job for them.

Dogs are not evolved from wolves as they are both still the same species,

Some genes are different. Dogs understand human voices and gestures. The understand for exampel what it means to point on a thing. Apes don't understand this gesture. Wolves also not as far as I know.

the dog however is actually been partly de-evolved and is now a parasite living off of humans

And not to forget: Many people see in the word "evolution" only a method to disclassify all unborn babies, all dogs, all Blacks, all Latinos, all Indians (red or not red) and all women - into the category "parasites" = "people, who like to steal my money, only because it is their money".

Or with other words: the relations between dogs and human beings are synergetic. They are for us here on this planet - and we are for them here on this planet. An average dog is by the way a master in psychology - compared with the average grown up male weaponed US-American. Proof: I never gave any of this male bullies any treat.

 

[Turtlesoup]

Indeependent

Actually Since Floods leave scars on the Earth Surface that last well basically forever----------we can safely say that there never ever was a World Wide Flood as described in the Bible. NEVER happened. We also know through genetics and DNA----that one pair of animals would not be enough genetics to repopulate any species----well other than a virus maybe.

 

[Indeependent]

Indeependent

Actually Since Floods leave scars on the Earth Surface that last well basically forever----------we can safely say that there never ever was a World Wide Flood as described in the Bible. NEVER happened. We also know through genetics and DNA----that one pair of animals would not be enough genetics to repopulate any species----well other than a virus maybe.

Show me the verse that states the flood was worldwide.
The majority of the globe was not yet populated.

 

[Turtlesoup]

Mushroom Oh lord----the Gildgamesh however it is spelled is the basis of the hebrew/christian story of noah. The jews stole the story and rewrote it suit their religion and then the christians stole the story from the jews. The gildamesh story was likely stolen from an earlier flood story praising different gods as well. Religions Steal/borrow stories from other religions and rewrite them to suit their and justify their own god----much like our current crop of vampire stories have evolved over the years.

 

[Turtlesoup]

Indeependent If the flood wasn't world wide---why would Noah need to take one pair of each animal to repopulate? And why with all that time wouldn't he just relocate to an area that wasn't going to be flooded instead of spending how many years building a boat? And if the flood wasn't world wide, then how did it wipe out all other humans-----and sorry but two thousands or so years ago--there were people in North America, South America, Central America, Austrailia, Europe, Africa, and Asia-------------5000 years ago--in the americas, Europe, Asia, and Africa as well...

 

[Indeependent]

Indeependent If the flood wasn't world wide---why would Noah need to take one pair of each animal to repopulate? And why with all that time wouldn't he just relocate to an area that wasn't going to be flooded instead of spending how many years building a boat? And if the flood wasn't world wide, then how did it wipe out all other humans-----and sorry but two thousands or so years ago--there were people in North America, South America, Central America, Austrailia, Europe, Africa, and Asia-------------5000 years ago--in the americas, Europe, Asia, and Africa as well...

Because there are different species on different continents.
There are also theories that all the continents used to be one continent based on the shapes of the shore lines.

 

[Dusty]

I don't have a science background and don't know much about evolution but I believe the answer to my question is YES. What say you? Here's an article that delves into the topic.

From Wolves to Pugs and Great Danes – The History of Dog Breeds

Updated October 24, 2024 – Learn about the evolution of dogs and how they went from wolves to the loving pets we keep in our homes.

www.morrisanimalfoundation.org

Nope.. Its a result of selective breeding.

Nope? ... No hope? ... Absolutelly wrong?

Where do you see the difference between "selective breeding" and "natural selection"? We use the natural law evolution since about 20,000 years when some wolves decided to make us responsible for their lifes. Looks like we made not a bad job for them.

Dogs are not evolved from wolves as they are both still the same species,

Some genes are different. Dogs understand human voices and gestures. The understand for exampel what it means to point on a thing. Apes don't understand this gesture. Wolves also not as far as I know.

the dog however is actually been partly de-evolved and is now a parasite living off of humans

And not to forget: Many people see in the word "evolution" only a method to disclassify all unborn babies, all dogs, all Blacks, all Latinos, all Indians (red or not red) and all women - into the category "parasites" = "people, who like to steal my money, only because it is their money".

Or with other words: the relations between dogs and human beings are synergetic. They are for us here on this planet - and we are for them here on this planet. An average dog is by the way a master in psychology - compared with the average grown up male weaponed US-American. Proof: I never gave any of this male bullies any treat.

Pointers are not doing anything different than a wolf, in fact these abilities are all natural to wolves. A modern dog is genetically 99.9 percent wolf so no evolution is present

 

[Turtlesoup]

Indeependent Pangaea isn't a theory.....it is accepted as science fact. It broke up millions upon millions of years before man was around including according to the bible.

And again, why not just relocate to an area that isn't going to be flooded if you know a flood is coming and again 2 of each species IS NOT enough genetic material to carry on any species. Inbreeding would lead to smaller and smaller offspring with more and more health problems assuming that any survived.

 

[Dusty]

Indeependent Pangaea isn't a theory.....it is accepted as science fact. It broke up millions upon millions of years before man was around including according to the bible.

And again, why not just relocate to an area that isn't going to be flooded if you know a flood is coming and again 2 of each species IS NOT enough genetic material to carry on any species. Inbreeding would lead to smaller and smaller offspring with more and more health problems assuming that any survived.

Because Noah is going to dig himself up and buildy a new arky

 

[Indeependent]

Indeependent Pangaea isn't a theory.....it is accepted as science fact. It broke up millions upon millions of years before man was around including according to the bible.

And again, why not just relocate to an area that isn't going to be flooded if you know a flood is coming and again 2 of each species IS NOT enough genetic material to carry on any species. Inbreeding would lead to smaller and smaller offspring with more and more health problems assuming that any survived.

Relocating is a possibility if the leaders would stop stealing money and committing adultery and paying attention to Noach.
No insult, but it’s obvious you never read the story of Noach.
Mankind became Chicago and had 120 years to deal with the warning.

 

[Dusty]

Indeependent Pangaea isn't a theory.....it is accepted as science fact. It broke up millions upon millions of years before man was around including according to the bible.

And again, why not just relocate to an area that isn't going to be flooded if you know a flood is coming and again 2 of each species IS NOT enough genetic material to carry on any species. Inbreeding would lead to smaller and smaller offspring with more and more health problems assuming that any survived.

Relocating is a possibility if the leaders would stop stealing money and committing adultery and paying attention to Noach.
No insult, but it’s obvious you never read the story of Noach.
Mankind became Chicago and had 120 years to deal with the warning.

Cool, mankind became Chicago, isn't that a made for Netflix movie where magic mushrooms sprouted in the street and cars were banned?

 

[zaangalewa]

I don't have a science background and don't know much about evolution but I believe the answer to my question is YES. What say you? Here's an article that delves into the topic.

From Wolves to Pugs and Great Danes – The History of Dog Breeds

Updated October 24, 2024 – Learn about the evolution of dogs and how they went from wolves to the loving pets we keep in our homes.

www.morrisanimalfoundation.org

Nope.. Its a result of selective breeding.

Nope? ... No hope? ... Absolutelly wrong?

Where do you see the difference between "selective breeding" and "natural selection"? We use the natural law evolution since about 20,000 years when some wolves decided to make us responsible for their lifes. Looks like we made not a bad job for them.

Dogs are not evolved from wolves as they are both still the same species,

Some genes are different. Dogs understand human voices and gestures. The understand for exampel what it means to point on a thing. Apes don't understand this gesture. Wolves also not as far as I know.

the dog however is actually been partly de-evolved and is now a parasite living off of humans

And not to forget: Many people see in the word "evolution" only a method to disclassify all unborn babies, all dogs, all Blacks, all Latinos, all Indians (red or not red) and all women - into the category "parasites" = "people, who like to steal my money, only because it is their money".

Or with other words: the relations between dogs and human beings are synergetic. They are for us here on this planet - and we are for them here on this planet. An average dog is by the way a master in psychology - compared with the average grown up male weaponed US-American. Proof: I never gave any of this male bullies any treat.

Pointers are not doing anything different than a wolf, in fact these abilities are all natural to wolves. A modern dog is genetically 99.9 percent wolf so no evolution is present

A lady here in this forum said once: An intelligent man is someone, who knows that tomatoes are fruits. And a wise man is, who knows not to throw them into a fruit salad.

 

[zaangalewa]

There is ZERO functional difference between them.

But there are genetic differences. I know they are the same species. But it is, indeed, an example of evolution, in the strict sense.

Birds evolved from dinosaurs but I'm sure there are genetic differences.

I grew up with dinos which were terrible monsters - slowly dinos become colorful entities with feathers. And who knows? Perhaps the T-Rex sang "Tirilii" when he saw new food.

 

[Dusty]

I don't have a science background and don't know much about evolution but I believe the answer to my question is YES. What say you? Here's an article that delves into the topic.

From Wolves to Pugs and Great Danes – The History of Dog Breeds

Updated October 24, 2024 – Learn about the evolution of dogs and how they went from wolves to the loving pets we keep in our homes.

www.morrisanimalfoundation.org

Nope.. Its a result of selective breeding.

Nope? ... No hope? ... Absolutelly wrong?

Where do you see the difference between "selective breeding" and "natural selection"? We use the natural law evolution since about 20,000 years when some wolves decided to make us responsible for their lifes. Looks like we made not a bad job for them.

Dogs are not evolved from wolves as they are both still the same species,

Some genes are different. Dogs understand human voices and gestures. The understand for exampel what it means to point on a thing. Apes don't understand this gesture. Wolves also not as far as I know.

the dog however is actually been partly de-evolved and is now a parasite living off of humans

And not to forget: Many people see in the word "evolution" only a method to disclassify all unborn babies, all dogs, all Blacks, all Latinos, all Indians (red or not red) and all women - into the category "parasites" = "people, who like to steal my money, only because it is their money".

Or with other words: the relations between dogs and human beings are synergetic. They are for us here on this planet - and we are for them here on this planet. An average dog is by the way a master in psychology - compared with the average grown up male weaponed US-American. Proof: I never gave any of this male bullies any treat.

Pointers are not doing anything different than a wolf, in fact these abilities are all natural to wolves. A modern dog is genetically 99.9 percent wolf so no evolution is present

A lady here in this forum said once: An intelligent man is someone, who knows that tomatoes are fruits. And a wise man is, who knows not to throw them into a fruit salad.

Actually a human's intellectual quotient is not determined by a tomato. Though some humans have the mental acuity of a said tomato. Then again other humans are quite mentally inferior to the same said tomato.