Selective Breeding and Evolution

[Byrd]

A lot of times, selective breeding is used to illustrate some of the process of evolution, but selective breeding actually punches a giant hole in the natural selection process of evolution theory.

Think about this:  Natural selection depends on random mutations that favor some survival in certain environments, and this, supposedly after gobs of very random mutations and time, makes for new species.

But selective breeding by humans is done with very careful selection of mutations specifically to create certain traits or exaggerate others.  It can cause change in a much shorter timeline. In fact we have some creatures used for genetic research like Drosophila melanogaster that have been bred for countless generations to drive change and show how natural selection "works".

I think some clarification is needed here:

Firstly, the "selective breeding" we do IS from mutations.  Take the Devon Rex cat (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devon_Rex) as an example... a wavy coated kitten was born (mutation) into a group of normal kittens.  The breeder loved the coat and the big ears and began breeding for those traits.

The goal isn't to create new species; it's to modify an existing species... but retain the species.  If we'd wanted to breed a new species, we would have done that.

However, human presence HAS created new species... like the species of mosquito that lives underground in London train stations (no kidding) and is so distinct from its parent species (living aboveground) that they can't mate (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/spea...tinctions/)

Wheat has evolved into several species (not just varieties; species) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheat

...and so on and so forth.