Dogs got domesticated only 17,000 years ago

[Raised By Wolves]

Originally Posted by flyndog

"...And that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be
banana-shaped."

"This new learning amazes me, Sir Bedemir. Explain again
how sheeps' bladders may be employed to prevent earthquakes..."

The Lord: "Oh stop groveling! If it's one thing I can't stand, it's people groveling!"
"Everytime I try to talk to someone it's "sorry this" and "forgive me that" or "I am not worthy"...It's like those miserable Psalms, they're sooo depressing!"

[Carrie]

PS We are all an Alien experiment.

Too many animals, they'd need a ton of people to care for the animals, there'd be a ton of animals' exretement, too much hay and other food for people and animals to fit on the ark and last for that long. Two of every animal and all that other stuff on that little ark?????

More like two seeds from every animal...DNA

[flyndog]

[Carrie]

Evolution: Origins of Life
By Punkerslut

Version 1.1

Chapter 2: Selective Breeding and Domestic Organisms

Copyright Notice
Evolution: Origins of Life is public domain. It may be distributed, printed, transferred, or stored - digitally or on paper, or in any form - in full or in part.



Section I: Selective Breeding

One of the primary arguments against the theory of Evolution is the claim that the process of Natural Selection has never produced a new species. I have often heard, "Evolution has never been observed to cause extinction or new species." However, this claim is false, and any person would be able to see this, even if they had only a slight education of the expansive field of breeding. For thousands of years, mankind has been breeding and rearing domestic animals and crops. Typically, farmers or ranchers will breed those animals which are best outfitted for the harvesting purposes. As an example, a corn farmer will plant 100 crops, and once these crops are each equipped with seeds and the farmer is read to plant again, he will take 100 seeds from the tallest corn stalk, and plant them again. According to the laws of inheritance, these 100 new corn plants will be tall, and according to the laws of variation, these 100 new corn plants will also vary in height. Once the corn farmer has done this process for several years, an entirely new species of corn would have developed. This process is known as Selective Breeding. To quote Charles Darwin, "The key is man's power of accumulative selection: nature gives successive variations; man adds them up in certain directions useful to him. In this sense he may be said to have made for himself useful breeds." [*1]

A great deal of our modern fruits and vegetables are often new species related to an older, inedible model. The pear, for example, was described by authors thousands of years ago as a fruit of inferior, inedible quality, but today it is sold by every grocery store. [*2] Wheat, as well, has been domesticated by mankind over the process of thousands of years. [*3] It is not difficult to find an improvement in the beauty of flowers, when we compare today's flowers to drawings of flowers from decades or centuries ago. [*4] Domesticated dogs rarely ever attack sheep or other domesticated animals, as this is seen in the instance of Sheep Dogs particularly, but when foreigners take undomesticated puppies from the natives of Tierra Del Fuego, the instinct to attack livestock and even humans. [*5] There remains little doubt among naturalists today that domesticated rabits are descendents of wild rabits. [*6] To quote Charles Darwin, "In the case of strongly marked races of some other domesticated species, there is presumptive or even strong evidence, that all are descended from a single wild stock." [*7] In Britain, it was once shown that over the course of several years, the cattle have increased in weight and maturity, a benificial factor to those who are in the slaughter business. [*8] Bakewell and Collins are also known for modifying their cattle through the process of Natural Selection. [*9] When two flocks of Leicester sheep were kept, one by Mr. Buckley and one by Mr. Burgess, after some time, an observer remarked thta the sheep, "have been purely bred from the original stock of Mr. Bakewell for upwards of fifty years. There is not a suspicion existing in the mind of any one at all acquainted with the subject, that the owner of either of them has deviated in any one instance from the pure blood of Mr. Bakewell's flock, and yet the difference between the sheep possessed by these two gentlemen is so great that they have the appearance of being quite different varieties." [*10] To quote Darwin, "...to assert that we could not breed our cart- and race-horses, long and short-horned cattle, and poultry of various breeds, and esculent vegetables, for an unlimited number of generations, would be opposed to all experience." [*11] A quote by Charles Darwin...


In practice, a fancier is, for instance, struck by a pigeon having a slightly shorter beak; another fancier is struck by a pigeon having a rather longer beak; and on the acknowledged principle that "fanciers do not and will not admire a medium standard, but like extremes," they both go on (as has actually occurred with the sub-breeds of the tumbler-pigeon) choosing and breeding from birds with longer and longer beaks, or with shorter and shorter beaks. Again, we may suppose that at an early period of history, the men of one nation or district required swifter horses, whilst those of another required stronger and bulkier horses. The early differences would be very slight; but, in the course of time from the continued selection of swifter horses in the one case, and of stronger ones in the other, the differences would become greater, and would be noted as forming two sub-breeds. Ultimately, after the lapse of centuries, these sub-breeds would become converted into two well-established and distinct breeds. As the differences became greater, the inferior animals with intermediate characters, being neither swift nor very strong, would not have been used for, breeding, and will thus have tended to disappear. [*12]
Several decades after the death of Charles Darwin, Sigmund Freud writes, "...the breeding of domesticated animals flourishes." [*13] Thomas Malthus, a reverend of the 1700's, would describe what was very much common knowledge of that era, "Were it of consequence to improve pinks and carnations, though we could have no hope of raising them as large as cabbages, we might undoubtedly expect, by successive efforts, to obtain more beautiful specimens than we at present possess." [*14] In a longer section, he writes...


I am told that it is a maxim among the improvers of cattle that you may breed to any degree of nicety you please, and they found this maxim upon another, which is that some of the offspring will possess the desirable qualities of the parents in a greater degree. In the famous Leicestershire breed of sheep, the object is to procure them with small heads and small legs. Proceeding upon these breeding maxims, it is evident that we might go on till the heads and legs were evanescent quantities, but this is so palpable an absurdity that we may be quite sure that the premises are not just and that there really is a limit, though we cannot see it or say exactly where it is. In this case, the point of the greatest degree of improvement, or the smallest size of the head and legs, may be said to be undefined, but this is very different from unlimited, or from indefinite, in Mr Condorcet's acceptation of the term. Though I may not be able in the present instance to mark the limit at which further improvement will stop, I can very easily mention a point at which it will not arrive. I should not scruple to assert that were the breeding to continue for ever, the head and legs of these sheep would never be so small as the head and legs of a rat. [*15]
I again state, that the process of Selective Breeding must be admitted as a great evidence on behalf of the theory of Evolution. If organisms can change dramatically, into different races, species, or families, under the hand of mankind, then why is it so difficult to believe that it cannot happen in a natural state of things? The processes of Selective Breeding and Evolution are nearly identical, with the solitary difference being that the first happens with a human guide, while the second with nature as a guide. Thomas Henry Huxley describes the process of Selective Breeding as it occurs in the domestic dog...


...there are some dogs very much smaller than others; indeed, the variation is so enormous that probably the smallest dog would be about the size of the head of the largest; there are very great variations in the structural forms not only of the skeleton but also in the shape of the skull, and in the proportions of the face and the disposition of the teeth.
The Pointer, the Retriever, Bulldog, and the Terrier, differ very greatly, and yet there is every reason to believe that every one of these races has arisen from the same source... [*16]

With all of this evidence considered, I feel that there should be no doubt that Selective Breeding is an active form of Evolution, but simply under the hand of mankind.

Section II: Conclusion

The process of Evolution, when in the hands of man, has been clearly observed to create new species of organisms. Natural Selection, though, with wild organisms, seems to be much more thorough and accurate than civilization. Whereas humans will judge an organism and choose which to breed, nature -- or at least, the laws that govern the physical Universe -- will kill those organisms which are not fit for survival or capable of breeding. As far as the theory of Evolution explaining the Origin of the Species as they exist today, it would seem adequate with the evidence that can be attributed to Selective Breeding. However, while the processes of Evolution can be shown to be adequate, as in the case of Selective Breeding, is there any direct evidence that natural Evolution is responsible for the creation of organisms as they exist today? I shall proceed to answer this question in the following chapters.

For Life,
Punkerslut

Resources

*1. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*2. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*3. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*4. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*5. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 8.

*6. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*7. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*8. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*9. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*10. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*11. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*12. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 4.

*13. "Civilization and Its Discontents," by Sigmund Freud, 1930. Published by W.W. Norton & Company, translated and edited by James Strachey (copyright 1961), with a biographical introduction by Peter Gay. Chapter 3, page 45.

*14. "An Essay on the Principle of Population," by Thomas Malthus, Chapter 14, 1798.

*15. "An Essay on the Principle of Population," by Thomas Malthus, Chapter 9, 1798.

*16. "The Perpetuation of Living Beings, Hereditary Transmission and Variation," by Thomas Henry Huxley.





With all of this evidence considered, I feel that there should be no doubt that Selective Breeding is an active form of Evolution, but simply under the hand of mankind.

Section II: Conclusion

The process of Evolution, when in the hands of man, has been clearly observed to create new species of organisms. Natural Selection, though, with wild organisms, seems to be much more thorough and accurate than civilization. Whereas humans will judge an organism and choose which to breed, nature -- or at least, the laws that govern the physical Universe -- will kill those organisms which are not fit for survival or capable of breeding. As far as the theory of Evolution explaining the Origin of the Species as they exist today, it would seem adequate with the evidence that can be attributed to Selective Breeding. However, while the processes of Evolution can be shown to be adequate, as in the case of Selective Breeding, is there any direct evidence that natural Evolution is responsible for the creation of organisms as they exist today? I shall proceed to answer this question in the following chapters.

For Life,
Punkerslut

Resources

*1. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*2. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*3. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*4. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*5. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 8.

*6. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*7. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*8. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*9. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*10. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*11. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 1.

*12. Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin, 1859, Sixth Edition, chapter 4.

*13. "Civilization and Its Discontents," by Sigmund Freud, 1930. Published by W.W. Norton & Company, translated and edited by James Strachey (copyright 1961), with a biographical introduction by Peter Gay. Chapter 3, page 45.

*14. "An Essay on the Principle of Population," by Thomas Malthus, Chapter 14, 1798.

*15. "An Essay on the Principle of Population," by Thomas Malthus, Chapter 9, 1798.

*16. "The Perpetuation of Living Beings, Hereditary Transmission and Variation," by Thomas Henry Huxley.

[flyndog]

Wallabies' 'Jumping Genes' Key To New Species, Says O'Neill
By Lucinda Weiss

Published in University of Conneticut "Advance", February 2004

"...But in the rock wallaby hybrids she has studied, the "jumping genes" insert themselves into chromosomes at fertilization and repeat themselves thousands of times, scrambling the chromosome arrangement. If that new arrangement is reproduced in offspring of the hybrid, which can happen fairly rapidly among rock wallabies, and the offspring thrive, a new species may form.

O'Neill proposed this in what New Scientist magazine called a "landmark paper" in Nature in 1998, just before she came to UConn. Since joining the UConn faculty in 1999, she has won a prestigious National Science Foundation (NSF) Career grant that is enabling her to continue her research into why the wallaby hybrids are jumping - not physically, but in their chromosome arrangements.

Jumping genes are massed in the centromere, the 'X' at the center of every chromosome. O'Neill called them the 'black hole' of genetics - they don't code for genes, they can't be sequenced, and not much is known about them. She is proposing that they may have a role in the formation of species.

O'Neill's research adviser at La Trobe University in Australia, Jennifer Marshall Graves, a collaborator on the Nature paper, has likened the speed of the change found in the wallaby genome to five minutes instead of 50 million years. The third collaborator on the paper was Michael O'Neill, assistant professor of molecular and cell biology at UConn, Rachel's husband, and a specialist in genetic imprinting, or gene expression that depends on the sex of the parent that transmitted it..."

[Carrie]

ABSOLUTELY FASCINATING!!! Thanks for showing us that. Wow. I hope to read more about it in the near future.

Oh....and by the way, I'm not yelling at you. You can tell by the tone of my voice that I'm ectatic. LOL.

[Ritz459]

What the flippen crap. I just had a huge freak'n long post all typed out with all of my arguments in them, and then it said I wasn't freak'n logged in! WHAT THE HECK! Now I'm ticked, because I really don't want to go back and redo all of that, especially since it took me about 20min to type and think up. This logging in thing has been screwed up for me ever since the site started back up....grrrrr....anyways, so be prepared for my post later, but right now, I'm to ticked off to right.

[Carrie]

http://www.globalpaw.com/showthread....4179post144179

[Ritz459]

Thanks for the link Carrie! Hopefully everything will be good now...and now that I have calmed down a bit, I'm ready to re-post my post. lol (But it probably won't be as good as it first was....*sigh* ah well.) Ok...well...where was I....

That is really neat about the Wallabies. So does their genes change completely or just enough to make them technically "not" related to their parents? (And, just a side note for my own curiosity, are Wallibies related to Kangaroos at all? lol Or have I totally got the wrong animal?)

Ok, anyways, I do have this to say:

1. Are these Wallabies being bred in captivity or in the wild? Also, would a new "speicies" form, or just another "type" of Wallabie? I mean, when Chis were formed they wren't another complete speicies than what an Irish Wolfhound is. Just a different type of the species.

Which brings me to Carrie's post. Micro Evolution is completely provable. You take a set of genes and then you manipulate them so by unlocking "hidden" genes, you create a new "creature". This is evident in dogs, cats, birds, horses and any other kind of animal that has "breeds". A pony and a Clydesdale are both horses, they are just different breeds. The "creators" of these took genes that were already there and made them more prominent with maybe some cross bredding accuring.
But Macro Evolution isn't so simple. What that is saying is that you have an organism and a new gene is created. Not "unlocked" but created. It wasn't there before but now it is. No matter how many times you "bred" a human, you wouldn't expect an arm to come out of their chest. That would be recreating a humans genetic makeup and adding soemthing that isn't there in the first place.

2. Another point is why are there no cross species if evolution happend slowly and eventually created a new creature? You don't see fossils of cells slowly turning into plants or fish or whatever, that slowly turn into lizards, etc., etc. There are no "cross species". And even if the scientists find four supposably, then how does that relate to the billion+ species we have in the world today?
And if things evolved from mutations, when has a mutation ever been good? Really? It might give you super human strength, but it might limit your life or give you a heart defect or something. And can mutations be spread from species to species? And can mutations happen all at the same time to create a mate for the organism? And since when have you been able to control a mutation? Let's say you needed long legs to reach food....what are the odds that your offspring (or you) will have a mutation for long legs?
I mean, take humans for example (again). If we lived in a place that grew gradually wetter and wetter, do you think we would develop gills, fins, and scales in the place of our toes, fingers, skin, and lungs?

3. Scientists say that the father something is down in the layers of earth, the older it is. What happens then, if a mass flood happens? An earthquake? A mudslide? A valcano? Those create a TON of earth being heaped on top of one another burying a lot of things with it. That would totally whack the dating system out of context.

4. And if we evolved from monkies, then why are they still around? Because things evolve just to fit into a better environment and survive right?

5. And why aren't people saying we evolved from a Banana? Because we do share 70% (or 60% or something like that) of our genes with them...oh I know. Because monkies are so much cuter.

6. Take a look outside your window. What do you see? Birds, grass, trees, bugs, maybe a dog or two. Plenty of rocks and dirt. I have my window open so I have a nice breeze blowing on me right now. I see some fluffy clouds up in the sky with the promise of some rain later.
Now, what is the chance of that happening by a mass explosion? What is the chance that the earth was created at just the right place that if it was a degree father or closer to the sun it would either burn up or freeze?
What is the chance that an explosion could create the very atoms and molocules that make us up?
What is the chance that that would make a cell, which is by far one of the most complicated organisims ever created?
What is the chance that that explosion would create water and land?
What is the chance that an ecosystem like we have today was created the way it is? It being so fragile that a simple bug introduced to a new enviornment can wreck havac?
What is the chance that the very air we breathe has just the right amount and kinds of chemicals needed for us to breathe?
What is the chance that the atmosphere (the ozone layer, etc.) was created in just the right way to protect us from the sun?
What is the chance that all of the laws of nature (math and physics especially) all corrospond together? There are laws all around us that it has taken brilliant scientists and mathmaticians to figure out and be stumped by. How did that happen by chance?
How are people able to think but no other organism able to? I'm not talking about thinking like, "Oh, if I go over there I'll be safe from the rain..." and "Oh, I'm hungry, let's ask for something to eat" but imagining. Have dreams, goals, ambitions. Puzzling about what tomorrow will bring. Having a conscience that helps us determine right from wrong.
No other animal has that. Now, some monkies (like Koko, the gorrilla who can talk in sign language), have more capabilities of thinking, but not at the same level a human does. What is the chance of that happening by a big blast in space?
Evolutionists must be pretty good gamblers because they sure are taking a big one that is based on pretty lousy odds and something that is still just a theory, not a law. Plus the person who founded this theory couldn't prove it...but yet it was grasped by a nation that didn't want to ecknowladge that there was a God.

. And if, but some stretch of the imagination, Macro evolution did happen and it did take place to create our lovely little planet, how in the world did the universe get created? Outerspace seems to stretch on and on and on and on. How did that vastness get created? How did the astroids, the stars (the sun included), the other planets, get created?

Everything in this world points to a supreme creator. Since I'm not supposed to debate about Christianity, I won't. But I will argue in the case of a creator. It is up to you to figure out who that creator is.

I also wanted to add something else, but agian, I'm not supposed to talk about religion, so I'm not going to....*sigh*

[Raised By Wolves]

Once upon a time...

Two Aliens were wondering what would happen if they introduced a new species into a pre-existing eco-system, without this new species taking over, and destroying the pre-existing flora and fauna.

One Alien argued, this simply was not possible. His research and experiments had concluded the only way plants and animals could exist in harmony, is if they evolved together, over millions of years.

Everytime he had tried this experiment, the non-indigenous, introduced species, took over and destroyed the pre-existing balance.

The second Alien replied, that if they gave the species to be introduced, a bigger brain, the ability to reason, the capability of abstract thought, and sympathetic enhanced emotions, the introduced species would have the ability to to choose not to take over and destroy their world, along with the other creatures and plants living there.

The first Alien said, he highly doubted this would be possible as all living creatures were naturally designed to protect and purpetuate, their own genetic code. These new creatures would have to co-operate with each other, rather than form themselves into groups to protect their own genes, by warring against each other as their populations increased, resources were depleted, and living space grew thin.

The second Alien suggested they come back at a certain point in time in this species' developement, and leave some guidelines and teachings with hidden messages, which these beings would eventually be able to decode, before they destoyed the planet and everything on it, with their emotionally wired big brains.

So the Aliens shook tentacles, drank some Romulan Ale, and began their experiment...

The Aliens are still out there, watching and waiting. And, pondering the mystery of where THEY came from, and who or what created everything in the first place.

Aw heck, we're just a bunch of Cane Toads with big brains.

[Ritz459]

Originally Posted by Raised By Wolves

Once upon a time...

Two Aliens were wondering what would happen if they introduced a new species into a pre-existing eco-system, without this new species taking over, and destroying the pre-existing flora and fauna.

One Alien argued, this simply was not possible. His research and experiments had concluded the only way plants and animals could exist in harmony, is if they evolved together, over millions of years.

Everytime he had tried this experiment, the non-indigenous, introduced species, took over and destroyed the pre-existing balance.

The second Alien replied, that if they gave the species to be introduced, a bigger brain, the ability to reason, the capability of abstract thought, and sympathetic enhanced emotions, the introduced species would have the ability to to choose not to take over and destroy their world, along with the other creatures and plants living there.

The first Alien said, he highly doubted this would be possible as all living creatures were naturally designed to protect and purpetuate, their own genetic code. These new creatures would have to co-operate with each other, rather than form themselves into groups to protect their own genes, by warring against each other as their populations increased, resources were depleted, and living space grew thin.

The second Alien suggested they come back at a certain point in time in this species' developement, and leave some guidelines and teachings with hidden messages, which these beings would eventually be able to decode, before they destoyed the planet and everything on it, with their emotionally wired big brains.

So the Aliens shook tentacles, drank some Romulan Ale, and began their experiment...

The Aliens are still out there, watching and waiting. And, pondering the mystery of where THEY came from, and who or what created everything in the first place.

Aw heck, we're just a bunch of Cane Toads with big brains.

LOL Yep, that is exactly what happend! lol And that basically describes some humans: Cane Toads with big brains (or not so big).