ain't dog breeding proof that evolution exist?

Answer 1

Yes, and so are mules.

Answer 2

For the 'micro isn't macro' crowd:

Claim CB902:
Microevolution is distinct from macroevolution.
Source:
Wallace, Timothy, 2002. Five major evolutionist misconceptions about evolution. http://www.trueorigins.org/isakrbtl.asp
Response:

1. Microevolution and macroevolution are different things, but they involve mostly the same processes. Microevolution is defined as the change of allele frequencies (that is, genetic variation due to processes such as selection, mutation, genetic drift, or even migration) within a population. There is no argument that microevolution happens (although some creationists, such as Wallace, deny that mutations happen). Macroevolution is defined as evolutionary change at the species level or higher, that is, the formation of new species, new genera, and so forth. Speciation has also been observed.

Creationists have created another category for which they use the word "macroevolution." They have no technical definition of it, but in practice they use it to mean evolution to an extent great enough that it has not been observed yet. (Some creationists talk about macroevolution being the emergence of new features, but it is not clear what they mean by this. Taking it literally, gradually changing a feature from fish fin to tetrapod limb to bird wing would not be macroevolution, but a mole on your skin which neither of your parents have would be.) I will call this category supermacroevolution to avoid confusing it with real macroevolution.

Speciation is distinct from microevolution in that speciation usually requires an isolating factor to keep the new species distinct. The isolating factor need not be biological; a new mountain range or the changed course of a river can qualify. Other than that, speciation requires no processes other than microevolution. Some processes such as disruptive selection (natural selection that drives two states of the same feature further apart) and polyploidy (a mutation that creates copies of the entire genome), may be involved more often in speciation, but they are not substantively different from microevolution.

Supermacroevolution is harder to observe directly. However, there is not the slightest bit of evidence that it requires anything but microevolution. Sudden large changes probably do occur rarely, but they are not the only source of large change. There is no reason to think that small changes over time cannot add up to large changes, and every reason to believe they can. Creationists claim that microevolution and supermacroevolution are distinct, but they have never provided an iota of evidence to support their claim.

2. There is evidence for supermacroevolution in the form of progressive changes in the fossil record and in the pattern of similarities among living things showing an absence of distinct "kinds." This evidence caused evolution in some form to be accepted even before Darwin proposed his theory.

Further Reading:
Wilkins, John, 1997. Macroevolution. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/macroevolution.html

Answer 3

Are you suggesting that there is high quality progression circuitously or as assumed through many respondents right here, propose a derogatory adverse progression..? yet i'd want to work out it certainly purely.. all of your hates of your President are stupid.. both in his international adventures or family members regulations like abortion.. Who in this international is operating truly for the best of all humanity.. with out an awl to grind for his united states of america.. so he would properly be eyeing for the gas wealth of the moguls in all patriotism.. which chief of a rustic ought to reflect the wish of all his human beings in each body of his movements / regulations..? if he had time-honored abortion as a coverage the finished communities of pious individuals and the humanists would have cursed him for killing existence against the law of nature..! He had no longer executed more suitable blunders than the great stalwarts of heritage have already executed in abundance.. there is nice and undesirable effect to each and each action and one ought to enable the guy elected to do what he thinks perfect.. you had deserved him once you had elected him in spite of everything.. the bombing of eastern cities had created no longer purely lack of life and suffering although the properly of a grimy conflict and an awakening that would would no more suitable win a conflict yet instruct suicidal as well.. it particularly is why there's a lot stress adversarial to any possibillity of atomic conflict.. Mr Bush is giving efficient classes to the electorate at the same time as heritage gave us classes.. you should ascertain the destiny route and in the experience that your intentions are advanced adequate you receives a good successor or get extra classes from yet another like of the present incumbent,,

Answer 4

Not as much as ostrich farming!

As ostriches hide their head in the sand to avoid reality so do God believers. Viva the evolution!

Answer 5

It's still a dog afterwards though, right? When have you ever heard of 2 dogs mating and having a litter of squirrels? Even if they come out with slightly different features than the parents, if you tested their dna they would still be dogs.

Answer 6

Yes and No.
Evoluation is a means that God gave us to extend our gene pool and one of His creations. There is no point in trying to dismiss His handy work and hope that this is all some chance encounter of organisms and that maybe Darwin was right after all. come on. There is more to life than what we know.

Answer 7

The diversity of them shows it, yes. You can see how most have a common ancestor and went their seperate ways. But it's not large enough on a scale to say" Then it happens to everything". But most evidence now shows that it does. So, no ,to answer your question, as it only shows some of it.

Answer 8

It shows that selection pressure can be exerted, and that "ring species" are important. It is not evolution in action, because it is directed.

Answer 9

i will say it again to all,, evolution does exist but only on a very small scale. not the ape to man garbage or ooze to man. my family is not monkeys but i guess some people want to think theirs is.

Answer 10

yes, microevolution is happening all the time. Thats all it takes is change, and time

Answer 11

Micro-evolution, yes, not and never (after many failed experiments) macro-evolutuion.