The best argument against evolution EVER

[Malienation]

Dogs and wolves evolved from a common ancestor. They can interbreed because the split is believed to have occured a mere 15,000 years ago. Because this is about the time that man formed permanent settlements, it used to be believed that man willfully domesticated dogs. The thought was that man successively breed them for obedience over many generations until they got dogs. However, as Raymond Coppinger outlines in Dogs: A New Understanding of Canine Origin, Behavior and Evolution, this is preposterous. It’s simply too difficult, even now, to successively breed wolves into domestication over multiple generations of not only wolves, but humans (wolf hybrid owners will tell you: seemed like a good idea until they hit reproductive age. Then, lookout…). Primative man would never have had the brains, will, and patience for this. Infinitely more likely is the notion that man’s presence domesticated wolves into dogs. The feeling here is that permanent settlements set up garbage dumps that attracted wolves, who scavenge. The human-shy wolves ran away and learned to stay away, but the more human-friendly ones stayed, fed, and bred with other human-friendly wolves. Primative man tolerated them because they scavenged what was garbage anyway, weren’t hostile to humans they knew, and chased away intruders.

[Cuckoorex]

@Malienation

Dogs and wolves evolved from a common ancestor. They can interbreed because the split is believed to have occured a mere 15,000 years ago. Because this is about the time that man formed permanent settlements, it used to be believed that man willfully domesticated dogs. The thought was that man successively breed them for obedience over many generations until they got dogs. However, as Raymond Coppinger outlines in Dogs: A New Understanding of Canine Origin, Behavior and Evolution, this is preposterous. It’s simply too difficult, even now, to successively breed wolves into domestication over multiple generations of not only wolves, but humans (wolf hybrid owners will tell you: seemed like a good idea until they hit reproductive age. Then, lookout…). Primative man would never have had the brains, will, and patience for this. Infinitely more likely is the notion that man’s presence domesticated wolves into dogs. The feeling here is that permanent settlements set up garbage dumps that attracted wolves, who scavenge. The human-shy wolves ran away and learned to stay away, but the more human-friendly ones stayed, fed, and bred with other human-friendly wolves. Primative man tolerated them because they scavenged what was garbage anyway, weren’t hostile to humans they knew, and chased away intruders.

Soooo…basically you’re saying that dogs are descended from wolves, only they were wussy-wolves, right? And that it wasn’t a product of human effort as much as human presence that reinforced that particular strain…?

[Malienation]

@Cuckoorex

Soooo…basically you’re saying that dogs are descended from wolves, only they were wussy-wolves, right? And that it wasn’t a product of human effort as much as human presence that reinforced that particular strain…?

Hmmm, bit of a misstatement on my part. The common ancestor evolved two ways, one branch turned into wolves, the other into dogs. Interestingly, Coppinger also posits the notion that dogs are might really be closer to coyotes than wolves (there is less overlap between dog behavior and wolf behavior than you think). It’s complicated, though, and the issues involved are by no means settled. But I did find the theory that dogs are not intentionally domesticated wolves well thought out and compelling.

[ReuvenB]

To quote a good (and sarcastic) friend of mine, “The real argument against evolution is Jesus Christ.”

[Darwin_s_Finch]

@Malienation

The common ancestor evolved two ways, one branch turned into wolves, the other into dogs.

I would say, almost certainly not:

The earliest remains of the domestic dog date from 10 to15 thousand years ago; the diversity of these remains suggests multiple domestication events at different times and places. Dogs may be derived from several different ancestral gray wolf populations, and many dog breeds and wild wolf populations must be analysed in order to tease apart the genetic sources of the domestic dog gene pool. A limited mtDNA restriction fragment analysis of seven dog breeds and gray wolf populations from different locations around the world has shown that the genotypes of dogs and wolves are either identical or differ by the loss or gain of only one or two restriction sites. The domestic dog is an extremely close relative of the gray wolf, differing from it by at most 0.2% of mtDNA sequence.
[…]
Dogs are gray wolves, despite their diversity in size and proportion; the wide variation in their adult morphology probably results from simple changes in developmental rate and timing.

The gray wolf is thought to have evolved roughly 1 million years ago – not 15,000 – during the early Pleistocene. Domestic dogs, obviously, are much more recent. While it is not outside the realm of possibility that dogs arose from the same ancestral stock as gray wolves, only the better part of a million years later than the gray wolf split off from it, the molecular data don’t support such a conclusion. Rather, they do support multiple origins from multiple gray wolf populations (that is, all domestic dogs do not share a single common ancestral population).

@Malienation

Interestingly, Coppinger also posits the notion that dogs are might really be closer to coyotes than wolves

Also unlikely:

In comparrison [sic], the gray wolf differs from its closest wild relative, the coyote, by about 4% of mitochondrial DNA sequence(Fig. 4). Therefore, the molecular genetic evidence does not support theories that domestic dogs arose from jackal ancestors.

[DesertDog]

@Cuckoorex

Soooo…basically you’re saying that dogs are descended from wolves, only they were wussy-wolves, right?

I’ve pointed this out to DesertRoomie more than once, generally when our guys are sprawled on their backs on the couch.

“These are the ones who couldn’t hack it in the wolf pack. These are the ones who traded freedom and independence for two squares a day. And belly rubs.”

[Malacandra]

See? See? One simple instance, and you evolutionists can’t even get your story straight!

[Mangetout]

Hmmm… If we define ‘argument’ as ‘excitable blurting of incoherent drivel’ and define ‘evolution’ as the view that ‘everything just came from the same mass of matter’, then yes, this is the best argument against evolution, EVER.