It at least 3000 years of breeding animals why haven't we got any new ones?

Question

A 3000 year breeding program is equal to 1 million in natural selection.

The liger only proves that lions and tigers are the same species.Same with the bears.

Mules can not reproduce.

A new species is expected.We have no new families

Answer 1

Ahhh, maybe (like the geico commercial) you did not do your research.

There are new breeds all the time.

A liger is half lion and half tiger.

Okapi is half zebra,half horse,and half giraffe

Answer 2

Oh, but we have. The mule is a new breed, certainly, and many other cross-breeds exist which would not have happened in nature. I believe there is a cross between a cow and a buffalo, called a beefalo, but I do not know if they are fertile; I think not. Also, many of the breeds of dog/wolf and such, which do breed true, would not have happened in nature, either.

It depends on what you mean by a new animal. Most domesticated animals are so different from their ancestors that if they showed up in the fossil record, they would be classed as a different animal. We call them by the same names, because we know what we bred them from.

Answer 3

that's a good question... The mule, perhaps? The corn - it's a plant but it is new. Certain species of horses did not exist 3000 years ago.

Answer 4

We can’t create more or different types of animals when we keep losing (destroying their homes so they end up dying) some.

There are animals that are the offspring of 2 different species. That species may or may not be asexual and therefore can or cannot create more. You may need the parent species in order to keep the newer species alive.

Answer 5

Evolution has no interest in speeding itself up in order to prove itself to human beings, who are in fact a product of evolution themselves.

Australia - an island country separated from other mainlands - is teeming with evidence of evolution. A recent news story reports unearthing ancestors related to modern Australian creatures:

< Scientists in Australia have found fossils of flesh-eating kangaroos and ancient tree-climbing crocodiles. These bizarre animals inhabited the continent up to 20 million years ago. The remains of at least 20 previously unknown species were found in the northern Australian state of Queensland.

Paleontologists uncovered some of unusual treasures at the famous Riversleigh fossil fields in northwest Queensland.

Among others, they found evidence of a saber-toothed kangaroo and a giant bird they nicknamed the "demon duck of doom." It would have been more than three meters tall and weighed around 400 kilograms.

Professor Mike Archer, who led the team of fossil hunters, says they made some extraordinary discoveries.

"One of the ones that sort of was most amazing to us was a range of kangaroos," said Mr. Archer. "There are weird, flesh-eating kangaroos. None of the kangaroos, and there are about 35 different kinds of extinct kangaroos in these deposits, none of them would've looked like anything we would have recognized today, because they didn't hop, these were galloping kangaroos, with big powerful forelimbs, some of them had long canines like wolves."

Other discoveries include the remains of marsupial lions, which carried its young in a pouch, and tree-climbing crocodiles.

Paleontologist Sue Hand says the researchers unearthed some frightening specimens.

"Some very large crocodiles, and also very, very big birds, some of these things are called thunderbirds, and they were very big, you know, some of the biggest ever found in the world," she noted. "And the ones that we found at Riversleigh include things that would've been about 200 kilos or more."

The Riversleigh fossil area was listed as a World Heritage site in 1994. Tucked away in a remote corner of the Australian outback, it is one of the world's most impressive fossil sites.

The scientists say the finds will give great insight into the evolution of many of Australia's unique animals, including the strictly vegetarian kangaroos of today. >

Answer 6

hey, have you checked out any information on a liger? its a mix between a lion and a tiger. its pretty scary, because its like twice the size of both of them.

Answer 7

I deal with cultavar plants every day that are incapable of interbreeding with their ancestor stock.

Here is a link to new species developing in nature as well:

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB910.html


EDIT: So you've never read one book about evolution NOT written by a creationists. New families take TENS OF MILLIONS of years to arise (not thousands).

Answer 8

3000 years isn't very long, but how about if I give you different proof of evolution. There are finch birds on the glapogos islands that evolved to have shorter beaks because of a new competition for their food.

Answer 9

Because in the grand scheme of things 3000 years is nothing really.

Answer 10

Evolution is a process that takes many several generations in their attempt to survive and adapt to new environments.

I don't know that breeding animals alone changes them, I think what's neccessary is changes in environments and thousands and thousands of generations, not even years.