[quote1326849483=Tonedog] The point of it was that you actually CAN go back in time [/quote1326849483] When you start a post off with faulty foundation...it is hard to continue...because it is based upon error. We can NOT go back in time. All we can do is LOOK AT EVIDENCE that we have HERE TODAY. This is NOT the same as actually observing things when the happened...because when you see it happen it is fact, but when you guess what happened it is theory. [quote1326849599=Astibus] And how would YOU [u]know[/u] any of this? Have you ever left the US? Or is this all TV knowledge? [/quote1326849599] I have left the country...and have been to the opposite side of the globe. As far as my knowledge, I'm sure you know you are not the only one with a degree in science here...both my B.S. and M.S. are in science. Your continual disrespect in debate really illustrates a lack of solid theory. Solid theory doesn't need to resort to childish nonsense. [quote] BTW, to show to you once again how you are misinterpreting what is actually being said, I didn't say that it equated to transhumance in the adaption stage thousands of years ago. I said it can be observed to this day. [/quote] What would be the point of looking at it today in a topic that is DISCUSSING the EVOLUTION of the LGD if you were not suggesting it to be a representative of thousands of years ago? [quote] Certain realities that exist in transhumance today most certainly have existed thousands of years ago. [/quote] So, you are using it to compare to thousands of years ago. LOL. Make up your mind. Is it a reference to the evolution of the LGD or not? If so, I would say it is not an accurate one...as the LGD today is ALREADY produced...and only needs to be maintained. If not, then I would say, why even bother mentioning it? Either way, its pointless as it doesn't refer to the original evolution of the LGD as a breed. [quote] Laughable, and insulting. Moreover, your affiliation with the South and Mississippi is considered neutral in your bias towards your dog type? [/quote] Laughable and insulting? So, you can make direct attacks...and that is ok...but if point at a SIMPLE SCIENTIFIC FACT that objectivity is best determined by neutral parties...you consider that offensive? Sorry, OBJBECTIVITY is necessary in true science...and the PROPER WAY TO DO THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD is to have 3 parties research the data...not associates. I don't make the rules, but I do live by them. As far as my dogs go...who cares? What does that have to do with the hypothetical evolution of the LGD as being artifically or naturally selected? What I do or don't do with my dogs today has nothing to do with LGDs. AND, in my opinion how the LGD developed doesn't alter the quality of those dogs either. They are what they are regardless of their history. Dogs don't read books. Referring to my dogs is simply a pointless rant IMO. I'll say it again...you should stay on topic. [quote] Same goes for our self-perceived ingenuity about the creation of dogs. We simply weren't that clever! If anything, it was the dogs that were "clever". (Based on population numbers dogs can be considered quite successful in their "survival" strategy) [/quote] So, after dogs showed man they were interested in having a relationship with humans...do you REALLY WISH TO STATE that man isn't intelligent enough to kill a dog that hunts, kills, and eats the the man's livestock? Thanks for the laugh.