Evolution Of The Bunny Vs Evolution Of Rabbit Dog

[Francie 6,368]

 

Bo its about dogs, so less of your slippery comments, I wouldnt say the dog or rabbit today, has evolved, the dog has been selected by man,from already existing dogs, an the rabbit well has adapted to its envoirment, its just not the dog thats trying to eat rabbit, birds snakes etc, so the evoloution of rab an dog is bollocks lol

Show me a good mutation in a dog, never heard of it, or in any other animal, especially one that benifitted the animal. Jmho

There's nothing sly about my comment, as a creationist you don't accept evolution and natural history so there's kind of no point in engaging you and I refuse to get into any religious discussion this post is about science, evidence and facts.

I didnt say sly, I said slippery, look again, an that was my point, were talking dogs here not religon, so whyd you bring it up anyway, im open to discussion, an love natural history, an science an facts, leave religon outa it.

 

So have you any science facts to answer my questions? Looking to learn here.

[Bo Duke 420]

Sly, slippery you're splitting hairs, I already said I'm not going to engage you. All you do is copy and paste things. I'm just leaving it there and not going to allow you to ruin what could be a very interesting thread.

[Francie 6,368]

Lad im not ruining the thread, YOU brought up religon, remember.an I said leave it out.

 

Ok if you cant have a discussion with someone that doesnt agree with you fine.

 

What I was trying to say is that the rabbit has many foes, an I dont think it evolved around running dogs, jmo

[brenner 773]

 

Just an observation.... Take a look at the side profile of a bunny.through natural selection ie .survival of the fittest, nature has deemed it necessary to equip these creatures with a roached back and that signature tucked in arse, allowing them to be powerful little sprinters over short distances. Would this description of their profile be a far cry from a dog bred for purpose, and in turn type ( evolution accelerated by man)with no other quarry in mind but the rabbit itself. Let's use the whippet as a comparison. Also the positioning of the bunnies eyes allows it to see danger approach from any direction, in front,from side, up above and almost directly behind.

Again.. Compare this to the sighthound.. Granted like most hunting animals their eyes are positioned at the front of their heads to give an advantage to chasing down prey from behind. But compared to let's say an earth dog the poriforal vision of the rabbit dog is second to none. It makes me think.. Is nature still in control of the evolution of hunting dogs but using man it's tool??? After all, we are all still a part of the cycle of nature. Food for thought! And yes, I'm bored

There is actually very little difference in the peripheral vision between different dog breeds and as for human intervention (selective breeding) when done correctly results can be seen in a relatively short time and whatever your desired traits or features can be bred in or out quite quickly however it can be undone even quicker by poor selection. We can finely tune parts of canines in the short time we are on this planet but we can never match the blueprint nature has already spent millions of years laying down (unless you're religious then one of the thousands of different Gods did all this in twenty minutes)

bo. I don't have a book of facts or a reliable source of facts on the difference between between the quality of vision in sighthound vs terrier. But I've always been led to believe by terrier men that earth dogs in comparison to most other breeds have poor vision. I'm not saying it's a fact so I'm ready to be corrected on that one. But like a said earlier in a post.. A terriers eyes are set deep in the sockets. I'm assuming this is due to the nature of their work. Then look at the sighthounds eyes, they are prominent from the skull, I would imagine that gives them a far better field of vision. Again. If anyone has the facts I never mind being corrected. As for the rest of your post, I agree with everything you say about how quickly we can change the shape of a dog for better or worse. In fact that is exactly what I was saying myself, I just used the term"accelerated evolution" by man as a way to explain what's actually happening. also I'm not saying we can match nature's blue print but it's worth noting the similarities of what nature created and what we have created to try contend with it. Not forgetting my last point was that we ourselves are actually part of the cycle of nature. A.t

B

[Bo Duke 420]

I've never heard that about earth dogs and terriers sight. You can look at a dog and easily see differences between breeds for example you say a terrier may not have such good vision but then his shorter nose would allow him to have less of a blind spot (more binocular vision) straight in front of him compared to say a sighthound with a long nose so maybe what he lacks in peripheral he makes up for in total FOV. Basically I was just kind of saying they wouldn't be massively different. To be fair we aren't really discussing changes in dogs and rabbits in evolutionary terms those slow changes take millions of years.

[brenner 773]

 

 

Bo its about dogs, so less of your slippery comments, I wouldnt say the dog or rabbit today, has evolved, the dog has been selected by man,from already existing dogs, an the rabbit well has adapted to its envoirment, its just not the dog thats trying to eat rabbit, birds snakes etc, so the evoloution of rab an dog is bollocks lol

Show me a good mutation in a dog, never heard of it, or in any other animal, especially one that benifitted the animal. Jmho

There's nothing sly about my comment, as a creationist you don't accept evolution and natural history so there's kind of no point in engaging you and I refuse to get into any religious discussion this post is about science, evidence and facts.

I didnt say sly, I said slippery, look again, an that was my point, were talking dogs here not religon, so whyd you bring it up anyway, im open to discussion, an love natural history, an science an facts, leave religon outa it.

So have you any science facts to answer my questions? Looking to learn here.

howye francie. I'll try ans your question as best I can but first it has to be said that I'm not saying the rabbit has evolved to its present form because of dogs. I'm saying that I think rabbit dogs have found their form because we are trying to catch the rabbit and therefore have ended up, through selective breeding with a dog that has some similarities in form. Now, on the subject of mutations bettering an animal, I will use the fish as an example. Let's say all fish started out silver in colour. Then one day thousands of years ago a fish was born with a mutation.. (he was born with a dark back and a silver underbelly). Luckily this mutation has its advantages... Birds of prey or bigger fish looking down at the darkness of the river bed don't spot him as easily as his silver back brothers because of his natural camouflage, while at the same time the silver underbelly works as camouflage against smaller fish that are mutant fish preys on looking up at the light. So it's fair to say his mutation in colour has not hindered him in feeding and it has given him a better chance at survival, therefore he lives longer than his brothers,and so has more chance of mating with females and passing on the mutation that served him well. That's just one example of many I could give you of a mutation bettering a species. It's pretty much what evolution depends on as far as I'm aware

[brenner 773]

I've never heard that about earth dogs and terriers sight. You can look at a dog and easily see differences between breeds for example you say a terrier may not have such good vision but then his shorter nose would allow him to have less of a blind spot (more binocular vision) straight in front of him compared to say a sighthound with a long nose so maybe what he lacks in peripheral he makes up for in total FOV. Basically I was just kind of saying they wouldn't be massively different. To be fair we aren't really discussing changes in dogs and rabbits in evolutionary terms those slow changes take millions of years.

I don't think either one of us has the facts on peripheral vision or better vision between breeds so maybe someone else can step in on that one and yes. Agreed. Evolution as we know takes millions of years but this is why I am using the term "accelerated evolution" when I'm referring to the rabbit dog. Maybe it's not a 100% accurate term but I'm sure you get the idea. A.t.b

[socks 32,253]

Greyhounds have stereoscopic vision which means they can spot things moving st longer distances than other dog breeds ... If I remember correctly it's something to do with the way the rods and cones in the eyes work .......

[brenner 773]

Greyhounds have stereoscopic vision which means they can spot things moving st longer distances than other dog breeds ... If I remember correctly it's something to do with the way the rods and cones in the eyes work .......

I've just been doing a bit of research on the oul Google box. From what I have read it is generally accepted that the sighthound has peripheral vision of 270 degrees. Where other breeds range UP TO 250. I'm guessing. The likes of earth dogs are on the lower end of the scale though. Humans apparently have 180. looking at the positioning and depth of eyes on some earth dogs, I don't imagine they score much higher than us if higher at all