I don’t consider dog breeding as evolution. What the evolutionists claim is that one species evolved into another ( if you look at it in it’s whole context). Dog breeding would be more similar to adaptation IMHO of course.
Breeding of dogs would be a great example of evolution fast-track because you are not randomly hoping for changes, you are purposely trying to direct those changes. The infinite number of random chance possibilities have been eliminated- but after thousands of years you still have a dog.
DNA changes by random selection over millions of years seems possible but highly improbably, to me. But it is only a theory anyway.
Adaption is loss of information, ‘evolution’ i gaining information NOT Specific to that species- The latter is a biological impossibility- the body has several lines of ‘defence’ agaisnt foreign invasions of non species specific information which is precisely WHY unlike KINDS can not breed and make viable offspring- The word KIND throws the evo for a loop- because htere are many KINDS within a species family- There ARE cases where Birds Isolated on islands ADAPTING to a point where they can no longer breed with the same species elsewhere is nothign more than a LOSS of information and NOT the necessary GAIN of information to produce evoltuion proper (macroevolution)- but htey are still the same KIND and will NEVER be another KIND- it’s biologically impossible for them to becoem another KIND and will eventualyl burn themselves out due to inbreeding- Loss of information such as this is NOTHING LIKE macroevolution
Basically I said exactly what you have said- Adaption is loss of information within a KIND