Major update: 10th March 2023
Some believe the different breeds of dogs prove evolution, that it is possible for a simple cell to develop into complex creature if given enough time.
Through deliberate, selective cross-breeding crossed to enhance favourable traits or dilute undesirable ones.
Table of Contents menu:
Table of Contents:
1. Do different dog breeds prove evolution?
Darwin proposed that given enough time the forces of natural selection could change the traits of species.
‘Dogs Prove Evolution’ by Steven Potter, PhD, is a Professor of Pediatrics, in the Division of Developmental Biology, at Children’s Hospital Medical Center in Cincinnati. 1
The neck of the giraffe would get longer, to reach more vegetation, the gazelle could get faster, to better escape, and the cheetah could get faster, to better catch the gazelle.
The artificial selection that drove the evolution of dogs is simply natural selection on steroids.
It proves the principle, and shows without a doubt that evolution is true.”
The last sentence: “It proves the principle, and shows without a doubt that evolution is true.” sounds very final and authoritative, but that is only one side of the story.
One part of the research that the NHGRI Dog Genome Project has been doing is looking at how much the DNA has to change to create change within dogs.
It is surprising how few changes within the genome (the entire set of DNA instructions found in a cell) will result in different ear shapes, a change of colour, etc, but these changes will not create a different kind of animal. 2
The researchers sequenced thousands of dog genomes and when blocks of DNA were found to be identical across two different breeds, that indicated historic interbreeding between them.
So yes, dogs can be altered in many ways and the results range from the tiny Chihuahua to the huge Irish Wolfhound.
The wolf ancestor did propagate into many different shapes and sizes, but none of them changed into, for example, a horse.
2. A wolf or a domesticated dog?
In Siberian ice, a preserved puppy or wolf-like animal has been found, but is it an early modern wolf or a very early domesticated dog?
Dogor, as it has been named, is estimated to be 18,000 years old.
He has well-preserved teeth, fur, a nose and even eyelashes and whiskers, and he looks kind of cute.
He was found in 2018, buried in the permafrost near the Indigirka River, north-east of Yakutsk in Siberia, Russia. 3
The first DNA test has unsuccessfully concluded whether it is a wolf or dog, so it will be interesting to see what further tests reveal.
3. Is the wolf-like ancestor the original ‘kind’ that God made at creation?
The scientific classification gives the wolf species as: Canis lupus which then has these subspecies:
- C. l. albus Tundra wolf
- C. l. arabs Arabian wolf
- C. l. campestris Steppe wolf
- C. l. chanco Himalayan wolf and Mongolian wolf
- C. l. dingo Dingo and New Guinea singing dog
- C. l. familiaris Domestic dog
- C. l. lupus Eurasian wolf
- C. l. pallipes Indian wolf
- C. l. arctos Arctic wolf
- C. l. baileyi Mexican wolf
- C. l. columbianus British Columbian wolf
- C. l. crassodon Vancouver Island wolf
- C. l. hudsonicus Hudson Bay wolf
- C. l. irremotus Northern Rocky Mountain wolf
- C. l. labradorius Labrador wolf
- C. l. ligoni Alexander Archipelago wolf
- C. l. lycaon Eastern wolf
- C. l. mackenzii Mackenzie River wolf
- C. l. manningi Baffin Island wolf
- C. l. occidentalis Northwestern wolf
- C. l. orion Greenland wolf
- C. l. pambasileus Alaskan Interior wolf
- C. l. rufus Red wolf
- C. l. tundrarum Alaskan tundra wolf
- Plus 14 extinct subspecies!
These are all in the Scientific classification of the family: ‘Canidae’ and a member of this family is called a canid:
…the canids consist of domestic dogs, wolves, foxes, coyotes, jackals, dingoes, and other dog-like mammals, all of which are agreed by evolutionists and creationists to share a common wolf-like ancestor.
‘Creationist modelling of the origins of Canis lupus familiaris—ancestry, timing, and biogeography’ by Cody J. Guitard 13
This is demonstrated by DNA comparisons 4 and the ability of the canids to hybridize (e.g. dog-wolf 5 , dog-coyote 6 , dog-jackal 7 , dog-dingo 8 , dog-fox 9 , coyote-fox 10 , coyote-wolf 11 ) oftentimes producing fertile offspring—perhaps, one might suggest, rendering their Canis lupus subspecies classifications trivial.
It is entirely possible that following the initial domestication, domestic dogs freely hybridized not only with wild wolves but also with other canids. 12
Creationists do not contest this scenario.”
Within the family: ‘Canidae’ is the genus: ‘Canis’ which has these different species:
So a lot of changes have gone on within the genus ‘Canis’ but this does not prove a molecules-to-man evolution.
All those different-sized canids in all sorts of shapes, are still wolf-like in structure and are therefore still within their ‘kind’:
Attention – by clicking ‘play’ your browser will load all of the Youtube Cookies.
Clicking ‘play’ means you are consenting to these Cookies.
We are told that there is so much evidence for evolution, such as anatomy, molecular homology, biogeography, fossils and direct observation, but is this true?
Things supposedly evolved at a tremendous rate to get to the complex creatures we have now, see the evolution of the horse.
Many scientists are atheists who want to find an answer to how the universe began, and that’s okay, but many seem to want to find an answer provided it doesn’t have to rely on God.
Whereas other scientists believe in God and even in the Genesis account.
4. Bible kinds are the original ancestors, not species
So what does the Bible say:
Then God said, ‘Let the land produce vegetation:
Genesis 1:11-25 NIV
seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.‘
And it was so.
The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds.
And God saw that it was good.
And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.
And God said, ‘Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth.’
And it was so.
God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night.
He also made the stars.
God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness.
And God saw that it was good.
And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.
And God said, ‘Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky.’
So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind.
And God saw that it was good.
God blessed them and said, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.’
And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.
And God said, ‘Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds:
livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind.’
And it was so.
God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds.
And God saw that it was good.
So does that mean that ‘kinds’ are species?
The answer appears to be ‘no’.
The Hebrew word mîn which is the word translated as ‘kinds’ occurs thirty times in Genesis, Leviticus and Deuteronomy and once in Ezekiel 47:10
In the ‘Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament’ it states:
Some have argued that when God created mîn (kinds), he thereby fixed the ‘species.’
W. C. Kaiser, R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer Jr., & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Chicago: Moody Press.15
This is a gratuitous assumption because a link between the word mîn with the biologist’s descriptive term species cannot be substantiated, and because there are as many definitions of species as there are biologists.
In light of the distinctions made in Genesis 1, such as the distinction between herbs and grasses which are, however, members of the same class (Angiosperms), it is possible that in some cases the biblical term mîn may indicate a broader group, such as an order…
God created the basic forms of life called mîn which can be classified according to modern biologists and zoologists as sometimes species, sometimes genus, sometimes family or order.
This gives no support to the classical evolutionist view which requires developments across kingdom, phyla, and classes.”
Let’s look at two examples:
a) Any kind of black kite
God created the creatures and plants in groups called ‘kinds’.
Then from there, they could change, but only within their kind.
Scientists are not always right with their theories.
The Hebrew word mîn (kind) occurs in Leviticus:
any kind of black kite”
Leviticus 11:14 NIV
The black kite (Milvus migrans) is a medium-sized bird of prey in the family Accipitridae.
By saying “any kind (Hebrew: mîn) of black kite” it is saying: “any subspecies of black kite”
Family: Accipitridae
Genus: Milvus
Species: Milvus migrans
Subspecies: Milvus migrans migrans – European black kite
Milvus migrans lineatus – black-eared kite
Milvus migrans govinda – small Indian kite (formerly pariah kite)
Milvus migrans affinis – fork-tailed kite
Milvus migrans formosanus – Taiwan kite
b) Any kind of locust
The Hebrew word mîn (kind) occurs again in Leviticus:
Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper.”
Leviticus 11:22 NIV
In Scientific classification, the order Orthoptera means “straight wings” and comprises grasshoppers, locusts and crickets, katydids and wētā.
The order is subdivided into two suborders:
Caelifera – grasshoppers, locusts and close relatives
Ensifera – crickets and close relatives.
So the Bible verse: “any kind (Hebrew: mîn) of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper.” must be saying:
“you may eat any grouping or genus of locust, katydid…“
The Bible word: “kind” (Hebrew: mîn) can mean subspecies, species, genus or family.
All variations of colour, body shape, etc, appear to only occur within their ‘kind’, and I would say that was because God made everything ‘… according to their kinds’.
If we accept the idea that things have evolved, like the giraffe’s neck getting longer to reach those more juicy higher leaves, then why is human childbirth still so painful? Surely females would have evolved to make it less painful?
Not all scientists believe that the Big Bang theory is correct, but not only that – it just doesn’t stand up to scientific criticism.
Stars and galaxies are apparently billions of years old, but there are a lot of ‘young stars’ that don’t fit with the ‘Big Bang’ theory. Also, how old was Adam?
How does that make us feel when we are constantly told that the Genesis account is a myth?
Are dragons real creatures that were like dinosaurs?
Genetics seem to be saying that there are three major people groups (the Bible also says that from the three sons of Noah) and that DNA can be traced back to one woman who is the mother of all humans, which they call Mitochondrial Eve!
Many scientists take for granted the building blocks of the universe and the scientific laws, without considering why.
References open in new tabs:
‘Amazingly preserved puppy with whiskers, eyelashes, hair and velvety nose intact puzzle scientists’ By Anna Lisowska and Svetlana Skarbo. 25 November 2019 The Siberian Times ↩
‘A review of selected features of the family Canidae with reference to its fundamental taxonomic status’ by Pendragon, B., J. Creation 25(3):79–88, 2011 ↩
‘Wolf-dog crossbreeding: ‘smelling’ a hybrid may not be easy, Mammalian Biology’ by Lorenzini, R. et al., 79(2):149–156, 2014 ↩
‘Agouti sequence polymorphisms in coyotes, wolves and dogs suggest hybridization’ by Schmutz, S.M. et al., J. Heredity 98(4):351–355, 2007 ↩
‘First evidence of hybridization between golden jackal (Canis aureus) and domestic dog (Canis familiaris) as revealed by genetic markers’ by Galov, A. et al., Royal Society Open Science 2(12):1–14, 2015 ↩
‘Do female dingo-dog hybrids breed like dingoes or dogs?’ by Cursino, M.S. et al., Australian J. Zoology 65(2):112–119, 2017 ↩
van Gelder, R.G., Mammalian hybrids and generic limits, American Museum Novitates 2635:1–25, 1977, p. 11 ↩
van Gelder, R.G., Mammalian hybrids and generic limits, American Museum Novitates 2635:1–25, 1977 ref. 16, p. 10. ↩
‘Studies of wolf x coyote hybridization via artificial insemination’ by Mech, L.D. et al., PLOS ONE 12(9):1–12, 2017 ↩
‘Canid hybridization: contemporary evolution in human-modified landscapes, Ecology and Evolution 2’ by Stronen, A.V. et al., (9):2128–2140, 2012 ↩
‘Creationist modelling of the origins of Canis lupus familiaris—ancestry, timing, and biogeography’ by Cody J. Guitard ↩
‘Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament’ W. C. Kaiser, R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer Jr., & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Chicago: Moody Press. ↩