It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Origin Of Dogs – Biogenetic engineering

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+11 more 
posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 04:45 AM
I was reading an article on the official New Dawn Magazine website and came across something that I thought was really interesting. The article itself was entitled: Ancient Civilisations: Six Great Enigmas - and included the usual suspects; The Great Pyramid, Mohenjo Daro, Sumeria, Teotihuacán and Stone Age Peru. The sixth 'enigma' was something different though.

It was under the heading: The Origin Of Dogs – Biogenetic engineering (which I have reproduced for this thread) and somewhat caught me by surprise.

Knowing we have lots of dog lovers here on ATS I thought some of you may enjoy it and, hopefully, be able to shed some light on it.

Let us start with a simple question that appears to have an obvious answer: what is a dog? It turns out geneticists in the past decade have shown the answer is not so obvious. In fact, generations of anthropologists, archaeologists and wildlife biologists turned out to be dead wrong when it came to the origins of “man’s best friend”.

Prior to DNA studies conducted in the 1990s, the generally accepted theory posited that dogs branched off from a variety of wild canids, i.e., coyotes, hyenas, jackals, wolves and so on, about 15,000 years ago. The results of the first comprehensive DNA study shocked the scholarly community. The study found that all dog breeds can be traced back to wolves and not other canids. The second part of the finding was even more unexpected – the branching off occurred from 40-150,000 years ago.

Why do these findings pose a problem? We have to answer that question with another question: how were dogs bred from wolves? This is not just difficult to explain, it is impossible. Do not be fooled by the pseudo-explanations put forth by science writers that state our Stone Age ancestors befriended wolves and somehow (the procedure is never articulated) managed to breed the first mutant wolf, the mother of all dogs. Sorry, we like dogs too, but that is what a dog is.

Think about those statements for a moment. If you are thinking that dogs evolved naturally from wolves, that is not an option. No scientist believes that because the stringent wolf pecking order and breeding rituals would never allow a mutant to survive, at least that is one strong argument against natural evolution.

The article states how, if the widely accepted version of the story is true, wolf/dog breeders today should have no problem replicating the process. However, they cant. A number of scientific studies have attempted to turn wolves into the equivalent of dogs by rearing them from a young age in human homes, and treating them like pet dogs.

The most recent of these was done by a team of researchers from Estovos University in Budapest. They took three-day-old wolf pups and home-reared them. They had no more success than many previous studies. The research had to be abandoned when the wolves were about 18 months old simply because these wolves had become too aggressive and were becoming a danger to humans and other pets.

As the article concludes:

The evolution of the domesticated dog from a wild pack animal appears to be a miracle! It should not have happened. This is another unexplained enigma.

The article appeared in a 2005 issue and so it's a little dated. Is this subject still a contentious issue or has it been resolved? A quick search around the net didn't bring me many answers. This article offers an explanation, although it's nothing new.

Throw me a bone here people.

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 04:58 AM
The same issue arises with several domesticated species - cows from aurochs, goats from wild goats, pigs from wild boar (wait until you look into food crops such as wheat and oats originating from wild grasses).
I'll probably get lambasted for suggesting this but I've been a fan of his for several years - have a look into Lloyd Pye's Domestication Theories

On a personal note, i've known several people personally to have tried raising wolf cubs as pets and all the animals had to be shot due to being too nervous or aggressive. They generally sit in the corner of the room and snarl whilst viewing everything from the side of their face. We have a lot of wolves here and they're not popular.

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 05:23 AM
Wolves would have developed a mutually beneficial relationship with man over a long period of time. Trying to replicate this complicated process by rearing wolf cubs in a modern home is just stupid. Can you link your source please? I have a strong suspicion this is another lame attempt by creationists to disprove evolution.

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 05:31 AM
reply to post by Atzil321

Well that's what I thought too - surely over generations a relationship could have formed?

Apparently one study found this could be the case. However, according to other researchers attempts to socialize wolves after the pups reach 21 days of age are very time-consuming and seldom practical or reliable in achieving success. Especially thousands of years ago.

I don't think they were trying to discredit evolution. I think they were trying to look for a more supernatural, extraterrestrial explanation.

The source is already linked.

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 05:37 AM
reply to post by LiveForever8

What a bunch of pseudo-science on that website. I strongly suggest you find some proper, scientific, peer-reviewed sources.

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 05:42 AM
reply to post by MrXYZ

Pseudo-science? Absolutely! That's kind of the point of the magazine.

I suppose if I cared enough about the subject matter I would go in search of scientific papers, but I don't. I just found the theory unusual and slightly puzzling and decided to share it.

Rip it to pieces with your peer reviewed papers if you can

+17 more 
posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 05:53 AM
Humans and wolves occupied the same environments since their beginnings. Naturally they interacted frequently. Both being social meat eaters, the humans realized that wolves were useful creatures, and the wolves began to know humans as sources of food rather then prey. Humans then found that there were wolves that were naturally more comfortable around humans and less aggressive. These semi-tame wolves were welcomed by humans. The more aggressive, nervous, and nasty wolves were most likely killed or run off. Over time through countless generations domesticated dogs arouse. Tameness is not only taught by nurturing animals from birth. It is actually naturally engrained in the animals' genetics.

The whole process has actually been proven. In Siberia foxes were bred according to their natural tameness, whereas only the most tame individuals were allowed to reproduce. This experiment/program was started in 1959 and is still on going. Now they are fully domesticated. They are not only comfortable around humans and tolerate being handled, but they actually desire human attention and affection and give it back. They are known to wag their tails, and great people with excitement. Interestingly through the selection of foxes solely on their tame characteristics, certain physical traits have evolved. Their fur has changed colors, their ears have become more floppy, their limbs have become shorter, and their tails have become curlier. This, I think, can explain why dogs have become so different from wolves.

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 06:01 AM
reply to post by Ariess

I really want a fox now.

Ariess has explained it really well and I doubt that you'll find a better explanation.

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 06:07 AM
if you own a dog its to teach you something you are failing to see in yourself, or possibly to remind you about something you knew you would need reminded about when you came here.

the origin of gods dosen't make sense. how could it. oh sorry. i meant to say the origin of dogs dosen't make sense. didn't i?


posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 07:00 AM
reply to post by Ariess

Thanks for that reply.

Really interesting

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 07:00 AM
I have often thought about this.

it just seems too convenient that we have these lovely pets,, this great food- pigs, cows, sheep etc... it's all too convenient!

until you bring in to the equation genesis 1:26- Then [the council of] god[s] said, “Let Us make mankind in Our image, in Our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

could these same 'gods' have engineered the convenient animals for the people??.. truth is stranger than fiction...

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 07:06 AM
I agree is a very interesting point, I did read a study that theorised that dogs used humans as fatalities in pups in the wild was 3 out of 6 at best and with human interaction and service it was 1 or 2 out of 6 at worst. if you look at dog breeding I suppose you could say that humans took them from their natural habitat and over time they changed and developed new features and skills to adapt.
As they are mans best friends they probably learned that they could be taken care off and became lazy and used to human care.

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 07:08 AM
Here's my two cents.
I have a pack of dogs 5 at the moment. Thousands of years ago man and "dog" shared an existence. "Dogs" weren't owned, they were more like extended family. No potties, no hygiene - living with other animals in close knit community - this kind of close contact and sharing relationship can't be replicated in the modern world. Food for thought.


posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 07:19 AM
"Throw me a bone". lol. F8, you are not a likely one to need someone's cast-off bone.

But I agree with the breeding theory, it makes sense to me. We changed their behaviors and habits through selective breeding and they were intelligent; and motivated enough to recieve rewards and consequently responded to behavior modification. Voila!

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 07:38 AM
The Russians answerd this one years ago so this mag you're talking about hasn't done its research. The Russians did it with wild foxes and within a few generations they had happy loving puppy dogs. There was not only a temperament change in the foxes but also shorter tails and the coats were different and that happened without introducing any other kind of dog to the breeding.

Take away the clinical way of doing it and put them in an environment where humans are sloppy, wolves like scraps and individual wolves have different temperaments. The more friendly ones would have been tolerated because they make good early warning devices and they would have bred in turn producing pups with those good traits and eventually reaching a point where the wolves are now people friendly dogs on the gravy train.

The russians proved it with the grey fox. Just Google it.

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 07:55 AM
It is a direct result of genetics and the evolutionary process and also what is called temperament.
And why you can't simply take a wild species of Animal and domesticate it in one generation.

Just as with the Fox experiment, it took several generations to achieve.

This is also how Dog Breeders perpetuate the characteristics of a particular breed and dogs specifically slated for breed show competition vs those that are less physically and characteristically less desirable but have a nice and pleasant temperament better suited as house pets.

Our dogs, whom are show bred Terriers, the grandfather Welsh was a winner at Crufts, were difficult to train due to their inherent aggressiveness which is part of the perpetuation of the characteristics of the breed.

Terriers were originally bred to hunt vermin in and around farms in their native England and it is clearly evident in their nature.

At the breeder's residence in Virginia, where she'll have a number of them at a time.

They actually hunt in packs and will bring down and kill any and all vermin regardless of their size on the Breeder's property.

Exactly as their wolf ancestors did.

Crufts is an annual international Championship conformation show for dogs organised and hosted by the Kennel Club, currently held every March at the National Exhibition Centre (NEC) in Birmingham, England. It is the largest annual dog show in the world, as declared by Guinness World Records, and lasts four days.

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 08:16 AM
reply to post by LiveForever8

But if their claims have ZERO bearing in reality, what's the point? You might just as well discuss "why unicorns are genetically modified by giant space turtles"

Clue: We know EXACTLY how domestic dogs came to be, and how they it's beyond me why they come up with such a nonsense hypothesis. What a rubbish magazine, at least unless you're looking for some fiction.

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 10:59 AM
No Mystery here, wolves were eventually domesticated by man as it was mutually beneficial and they are already programmed to be pack animals so it was a no brainer so to say for both man and wolf.

Studies now have failed to reproduce this but man 100,00 years ago was, erm man enough to deal with a rowdy wolf and they would have persisted.

It prob went a lil something like this
Baboons Make Pets Of Feral Dogs


posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 11:07 AM
It can be replicated with Foxes to some degree.... but aparantly not with wolves.

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 11:16 AM

Originally posted by LiveForever8
This is not just difficult to explain, it is impossible. Do not be fooled by the pseudo-explanations put forth by science writers

And here's the indication that the article is a load of horse manure.

When science has a good explanation for something and some pseudoscientist comes along and says that it's "impossible to explain" and encourages us to disbelieve scientific findings - we have strong indicators of baloney.

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in