Originally posted by steveknows
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
You've twisted what I said. The question is that is a dog a domesticated wolf and it has nothing to do with a jackel. All animals you've mentioned
aren't found with wolves though it has been known for dogs to run with wolves. Also the wolf/ dog pup thing you mentioned would be a pup that had
both predomestication and postdomesticated traits it would be no different to a pup of a poodle and a Labrador looking like a labradoodle, sorry but
your point there was lame.
Your point was that a species is defined by viable offspring. I simply game you counterexamples of interfertile animals that are nevertheless
different species. Perhaps it's due to the inherent fragility of the "species" classification itself that causes the confusion.
Basically? it doesn't matter if two populations could theoretically
produce viable offspring, if those populations do not do so when left to
their own devices. A good example is a variety of frog, the Narrow-mouthed toad. it has a species on the east bank of the Missisippi, another on the
West. Amphibians being what they are, there's overlap. Problem is, the two are completely physically identical. The only
way to tell them
apart is through their calls. presumably htye are completely interfertile. But they never breed together... because their calls are different. The
males of one species have a song that only appeals to females of that species.
Similarly, all those canids send off different sexual cues that generally prevent
natural interbreeding. Thus they are different species.
What I've said in previous posts isn't my concept this is what the books written by the experts say and you've only proven what I say as
wrong to you and not to the reality of it.
Your books aren't necessarily wrong, just not as detailed as some more involved works on hte subject. Of course interfertility is a basic
prerequisite - but if the populations don't bump uglies on their own, then they're different species. Fairly simple.
You've started talking about a lion with sheeps traits and such and it's just rediculous to compare some sciencfiction animal with the
natural process of domestication.
Sigh. No. Domestication is a product of selective breeding - that is choosing animals or plans for favored traits. You brought up that lions or bears
could not be domesticated. I pointed out that, even if this were true, the process by which domestication was achieved
can still be applied. So
if we wanted to breed, say, a lion whose mane covers the entire body, or a bear with a super-short muzzle? We could certainly do so. I'd even wager
we could domesticate them, given the right selection process (we've done it with wild foxes after all)
A person can make anything fit anything if you ignore the facts and forego commonse sense.
You'd be amazed at how often "common sense" is useless in biology. I still meet so many people who think hyenas are a kind of canine, for instance.
"it's common sense!"
I'm sorry but you're argueing against proven science on so many levels and not just whether or not dogs are domesticated wolves.
Actually I never argued that dogs are not descended from wolves; rather I argued over the method by which wolf became dog. I don't think the "camp
scavenger" model is accurate. I think it's more likely that wolves were deliberately taken, tamed, and later domesticated by humans.
Now from what I can make out of what you've said in regards to evolution you've basically said that the 6 foot tall bronzed Aussie on the
Gold coast of Australia is a branch off but not of the same species as the Pigmy in Africa.
See that prefix? It's really important. They are both the same species.
However due to geographic isolation of their ancestors, they have both received a different "package" of physical traits that result in the pretty
divergent appearances between the two in your example. However given the opportunity (and a little romancing, one presumes) the two people in your
example would happily pair up and make a medium-sized brownish-reddish frizzy-haired baby for all the world to admire. As travel becomes easier, those
geographic barriers cease to be an issue, and humans are slowly but steadily returning to a single population.