So why not just use Dalmatians?
Posted on 12/26/2009 11:47:03 AM PST by Clint Williams
gamebittk writes
"In 1959, Soviet scientist Dmitri Belyaev set out to breed a tamer fox that would be easier for their handlers in the Russian fur industry to work with. Much to the scientist's shock, changes no one had expected emerged after just 10 generations. The foxes began behaving playfully, were smaller in size, and even changed color — much like dogs."Belyaev died in 1985, but the experiment continued (PDF) in his absence, and to this day provides strong evidence to parts of evolutionary theory. The experiment eventually branched out to involve other species as well.
“You might be interested” ping.
It’s not nice to fool Mother Nature.
It’s simply deliberate genetic selection, done by humans to breed for non-aggression.
We’ve bred dogs like this for all of recorded history, so far as I know.
It doesn’t contradict creation science precepts at all.
And there is no changing of species. The highlight seems to imply that. But they just talk about how they are doing it with rats, and foxes, and other animals. Not that foxes are changing into rats.
Those comments suggest that sometimes evolution goes backwards. :(
I've seen politicians turn into rats.
Three finger Dmitri Belyaev tames foxes.
It is unwise to try to interpolate or extrapolate too much into this, and I can make a pretty reasonable proof: dogs. A relatively few people over a not-very-long time selectively bred dogs into the incredibly diverse number of breeds seen today.
All this proves is that dogs have a more flexible genetic pattern, that is very responsive to human selection. However, and this is a big if, if dogs are left to their own devices, they will tend to breed to a “standard” variety best equipped for the situation. The example of this is the wild Australian dingo.
As far as domestication goes, it is an effort to select the trait of immaturity in adulthood. A domestic animal is stuck in emotional adolescence its whole life, it never becomes an emotionally mature wild animal. And this is why there are relatively few domestic animal species that have been tamed by humans.
It can be added that, as an aside, governments much prefer it when people are domesticated as well, and make efforts to encourage the public to keep its emotional immaturity, as they are easier to control.
Wrong. Politicians are rats.
Nice try, but not a good argument for evolution.
Foxes left on their own will remain wild. Only when man intrudes via intentional breeding do they change. Release those same critters back into the wild and bing, wild-acting foxes again in a couple of generations or less.
Dawkins commits the same logical errors in The Blind Watchmaker.
Or might be involved in making the population more malleable and subservient. Just sayin’
So why not just use Dalmatians?
No evolution here, they are still foxes.
And there is no changing of species. The highlight seems to imply that. But they just talk about how they are doing it with rats, and foxes, and other animals. Not that foxes are changing into rats.
But if they were able to do it long enough, it would probably become a creature as nearly distinct from a fox as a rat. And in nature all sorts of life forms, which this experiment and many others have demonstrated are pretty malleable, have had millions upon millions of years to adapt and change. . .
Most people prefer domesticated people too.
Saves all of us from spending every waking moment either fighting for our lives or being on constant guard for an attack. Allows us to do other things.
Which is precisely what evolution is. The only difference is in what (or who) applies the "selective force", man or Mother Nature.
And just a few days ago, a Rat evolved into an Elephant.
Unfortunately, domestic humans are utterly worthless. While it is easier to control a herd of sheep, all they are good for is wool and meat.
The wilder, and more untamed an animal or person is, the more they are able to sustain themselves. You can be on friendly terms with them, or you might be their enemy, but you will know where you stand.
If they are your friend, they will likely be a loyal friend, but not a slave. If they are your enemy, you can still respect them at a distance, and know their rules. True adults, either animals or people, only do things with a purpose, not out of whimsy.
The origin of western law has two bases. One is Roman Law, where the people serve the state, are judged by their masters, and are guilty until proven innocent. That which is not permitted in the law is by default prohibited.
The other is the Common Law, with origins in the Germanic tribes. Warriors were equal before the law, and served their own interests. They can only be judged by a jury of their warrior peers, and they are assumed innocent until proven guilty. That which is not expressly forbidden by the law is permitted.
Warriors, true adults, or wild animals must be treated with respect, or they will fight. But if treated with respect, they will often return this respect.
Domestics, be they animals or people, are creatures of the herd. They do not excel, and their stragglers are discarded. They have little or no individuality, and the world is not changed for better or worse by their passing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.