What have we done ?

>"teach the controversy" septic thinking he is an authority on evolution

Selective breeding is a selection pressure. Evolution is the change of heritable traits over time.

In the same sense that cattle underwent evolution? I guess that's literally correct, but the connotation of "evolution" entails the exact opposite of what happened to cattle and is happening to dogs.

No it doesn't.

What emotion? You insectoid bastards lack that.

Your confusing the term natural selection and evolution. Evolution is the fact that animals change over time. They can change due to natural selection, where in the environment changes and favors certain characteristics. But they can also change due to sexual selection, where mates select traits. I'm not sure if there's a better word for domestication but we're applying a selection pressure and causing the animals to evolve over time.

That's your misconception, not the general truth.

humans are part of nature. Human selection is natural selection.

This is old news. Its why japs give girls big kawaii eyes. Why is this news?

if you hate or dislike dogs just kys

Attached: 1544834872551.jpg (481x357, 102K)

Actually that's probably a good way to put it, we've created a new environmental niche for pets and they're adapting to it.

This is nature working as intended. You are not outside the system.

Nothing is messing up anything. Co-evolution and symbiotic relationships are are more than abundant in nature, so is selection for neotenous traits.

I like dogs but sometimes I get urges to beat them

Dogs eyes arent evolving, they already have evolved. Dogs have been working with humans for over 50k years. They are small, easy to tane and feed and help with hunts.

All evolution is is genetic change over time. That's it. It doesn't matter if it happens through natural selection or selective breeding. It's all still evolution. Think about it this way. The wolves had a trait that allowed it to survive its encounter with humans. The wolves that didn't have that trait were killed off causing that initial trait to be passed on. The same thing happens without humans when animals encounter a new environment or species. Those that can survive that new situation can pass its genes on and the others die.

As I said, you are LITERALLY correct, but the CONNOTATION of the word "evolution" as it's used popularly (the definition of connotation btw), indicates a forward-moving adaptation towards a focused skill or capability, which might be at the cost of something else, but generally improves the proficiency of an animal towards something.

You misunderstood what was saying because you assumed he used "evolving" purely literally, which is a fucking retarded assumption to make, if not outright malicious.

Attached: 1540858101653.jpg (400x411, 44K)

youtube.com/watch?v=x5e_vNNkbCI
Aside from the fag part in the song, good stuff.

Attached: Diogenes.jpg (1800x1322, 3.32M)

Our emotion is the nature based nip

>Our emotion is messing up the nature.
But our emotions are part of the nature.

in ancient times animals adapted to human behavior.
today they adapt to human emotion.

Attached: f6d1fda51.jpg (672x747, 89K)

Tojo seething that the canine in pic related has prettier eyes than the entirety of his country. Jap women crave that BCC (Big Canine Cock)

>Our emotion is messing up the nature.
It's called godhood evolution, you insect

Attached: nietch zuro.png (500x604, 149K)

That connotation of what evolution is only exists with people outside of the scientific community. Words have definitions and that's why we decide to use certain words in conversation. Just because we use the correct definition doesn't mean we're making a "retarded assumption" or being "malicious". It just means you don't know what the word means.

It is a symbiotic relationship, nothing wrong with it, has evolved in many species

Dog's are human wolf hybrid abominations.
Pigs are human swine hybrid abominations.

If you live in an apartment and you have a dog, you should be shot on sight.

Dogs are not pets, they are the best buddies you will ever find.

Evolution isn't the "fact that animals change overtime". That's wrong.

youtube.com/watch?v=ipSTntA_Znw

Attached: 1521465395803.jpg (640x612, 77K)

Evolution isn't the "change of heritable traits over time". Its a theory on how and why animals might change over time. Its not a statement or a fact, its an explanation.

>When the Brazilian understands evolutionary theory better than all the white people in the thread
wtf

Attached: 1557692907129.jpg (258x245, 23K)

Sounds like dogs evolved into being parasites that use up human resources that would be better used for raising human kids. Pitbulls are next level of dog evolution as they actively eliminate their competitors. If you have a dog, you are likely to be a cuck, think about it you are raising another animals offspring.

Indians don't hate dogs and they're by far the largest group of brown people

It's selected by humans yet they're making out that dogs digivolved to manipulate us.

This is clearly (((cat))) propaganda, because it's well established that cats don't have empathy and developed manipulative traits. The article tacitly admits that dogs pick up on human emotions and it's already established that the extent of their awareness of human emotion doesn't end at nuzzling and meowing for tuna like (((Felines))) do.

Connotations are part of linguistic evolution and are intrinsic to language itself. Humans discuss concepts through words, and regardless of the words used, the first point of a conversation is to understand what a person "means" by the words he says.

Instead of attacking the idea, you chose to attack the words used to express that idea. That doesn't put a dent in the concept he, that user, was trying to describe. It's fucking meaningless. But yeah right, we're supposed to roleplay scientific discussions just for the sake of it.

Connotations are orbiting concepts around a single axis, which is the literal definition. One does not invalidate the other. So trying to "deny" the existence of the idea that user tried to express by pointing to the literal definition of "evolution" is fucking non-sensical.

You're just trying to shape the point he made into something else so that it can be discarded easily. Never mind the point itself.

It is a statement. Assuming it is the reason everything is the way it is, is where it becomes a theory. The act of selecting genes and changing dna is very observable you brainlet nigger. We witness Micro evolution every day, macro evolution is hard to replicate in our lifetimes.

Dogs are evolving, yet niggers are still chimps.

>burger education

And humanity asked itself

What have i become
What have i done

Humanity is a failed species, most of you shouldn't exist. You are far below the bare minimum expected from a complex mammalian:

- Attack parasites and predators
- Protect their offspring
- Defend their allies
- Act coherently and in tune with reality
- Avoid unnecessary stress, pain and frustration
- Never overexploiting resources
- Avoiding overpopulation
- Never destructing things due to mental retardation

You fail at all of this.

Say what?

Attached: besthuntingdog2.jpg (1000x723, 124K)

Evolution isn't real you retard

Attached: 72BA1F17-0A59-436D-939B-54FE7B15183B.png (868x760, 195K)

That evolution happened twenty thousand years ago, english teacher

I actually wanted to have a scientific discussion, but instead I have to explain definitions to a Brazilian mutt. Again, just because you think the word evolution means one thing doesn't mean it actually has that definition. You're just asshurt because you think it's okay to change what a word means in order to fit your argument.

more like this:
Evolution results in defense mechanism that allows the host to survive, like chameleon skin or rhino horn.
In case of dogs, their expression manipulates human emotion that results in PETA, animal rights, etc. No body can harm dogs without getting arrested. That's how their defense mechanism works.

Non-working dogs are basedboy pets, how have you not realised this?
The chad choice of pet is the cat - both human and cat can live in a healthy harmony where both are fully independent yet provide benefit to each other. There is no faggotry involved, you do not "need" the cat and the cat does not need you, you just like having an interesting animal walking around your house.
Now dogs on the other hand are for weak faggots that are so devoid of human connection that they adopt some dirty mutt into their house that can't even hunt for itself or walk outside unattended and call it their "friend". It takes an extreme level of social retardation and estrogen to fall to this kind of level. Dog owners are basically beta providers but 10x worse.

Im sorry about your education John

Attached: 1560660626876.png (689x473, 97K)

Over 30,000 years ago, actually.
Dog domestication and selective breeding began even before homo sapiens sapiens. Cro-magnon hominids began the process.

>Dogs aren't evolving. Humans are just selecting them like they do everything fucking else.
Evolving as he used means
>a forward-moving adaptation towards a focused skill or capability, which might be at the cost of something else, but generally improves the proficiency of an animal towards something

This is what he tried to convey. It just so happens that there isn't a single word in the dictionary that would encompass the concept he tried to convey. How utterly incapable are you to try to deny this very simple point he made by pointing to the literal definition of "evolution"?

The language we use is a bridge to higher concepts: they don't define the concepts themselves. You have it all backwards, dude.

We are nature. Nature cant mess up nature. Its all just nature however it goes. What "we" are is arrogant, self centered, and self important.

>forward-moving adaptation
missconception for retards that can't into difficult things

it's ok, it's not your fault
I blame your parents

>semantics aren't real lol
Show me your flag.

rare

>but the connotation of "evolution" entails the exact opposite of what happened to cattle and is happening to dogs.
The popular connotation has nothing to do with the scientific term.

Based doggos.

mans best friend is evolvong to become better best frens.

You're trying to redefine evolution as directed intelligent design. Evolution doesn't have a 'forward direction'.

Did you know hair was once a parasite? It evolved to become a piece of us.

Shut the fuck up dogs dont live in the wild you crazy environmentalist

My first gf in high schools mom had a large retired German police dog
And she was single

I used to joke with my gf that he railed her mom and she fucked the dog all the time

But I wasn’t actually joking , I seriously thinking that she was fucking that German Shepard
Her mom was 110% certified insane

Apparently dogs in China never evolved

kek

The paper that Darwin wrote was called "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection". The paper explains how evolution can occur through natural selection. Evolution by artificial was already understood and exploited to create domesticated cattle and dogs. Darwin just figured out how evolution works in the absence of a breeder. Once you realize that the distinction between artificial and natural is itself artificial and that man is not separate from nature, then you've unified what appeared to be two separate phenomena.

This. My dogs are me family, my pack.
Two 80 labs, who I hunt with, swim with, play with, treat them as good as real family, and they treat me like their God king, including defending my home. Also friendly as fuck. Love them more than I love my wife to be honest.

The literal term has nothing to do with the way he used the word, it's therefore useless to point it out as a way to deny the concept meant to be conveyed. That is to say, it does not harm the point he made because it doesn't interact with it.

Exposed by the aquamarine color, and then trying to convey it as either a shade of green or blue, doesn't validate or deny the color itself.

In the same way, the concept he meant to express by writing the world "evolution", is a valid concept and does not depend on the word used to express it. Denying the word used does not turn the concept invalid.

It's fine to call him a retard for choosing the wrong word, but the very basic concept he tried to express is still fucking fine, look at this:

>Dogs aren't progressing. Humans are just selecting them like they do everything fucking else.

No concept changed, just the word used to express it.

Attached: 1552869546860.png (750x734, 852K)

>selectively breed wolves until they stop being wolves
>continue this until the now-dogs become even more desirable
>even branch out until foxes are genetically domesticated
>some retarded bong journalist finally observes this after tens of thousands of years
>writes it up as alarmist pintrist-tier bullshit

Attached: 1545046056100.jpg (1200x1200, 175K)

I had the intention to also reply to this post in my post above, but I forgot to.

Attached: 1557064538159.gif (200x272, 2.21M)

Is that a selfie, brazil nigger?

Was meant to be but I forgot to switch to the front camera. If you want me to delete it, fax me nigger.

lmao oh no

How is this a bad thing exactly?

So how does one apply this to Jews? How do I make them evolve to be less of a parasite and more like working folk?

Evolved from what? Dogs have always had those eyes.

i know that feel bro.

>Our emotion is messing up the nature.
Fuck off, we are nature.