isadore;1205043 wrote:But gosh a ruddies they have not broken off, they are still part of the wolf species.
They're part of the same species AS wolves, but wolves are a characterization of the majority of the SUBspecies, one of two exceptions being the domesticated dog. Hence, they are the same species, but neither is "the species."
I'll restate, as I hate to see your memory show such little strength.
"Since 2005, 37 subspecies of wolf are recognised, including the red wolf and not including two Canis lupus subspecies: Canis lupus dingo and Canis lupus familiaris."
Now, let's find something else, shall we?
How about an academic study? That sounds nice.
http://www.dur.ac.uk/news/newsitem/?itemno=14665
While the subspecies of domestic dogs are DESCENDENT from grey wolves (the species has not varied to the point of new species yet), just as the several subspecies of modern wolves, the two are not the same.
isadore;1205043 wrote:They are part of a group of living organisms consisting of similar individuals ( with dingoes and modern wolves) capable of exchanging genes or interbreeding.
Yes, they are members of the same species as dogs. Most subspecies therein are classified as such. Domestic dogs are the exception.
isadore;1205043 wrote:They continue to have the instincts of their ancestors and the fellow members of the species.
According to Durham University, this is untrue.
But I'm sure you know more than their science and research departments do, right?
Amongst dog attack-related deaths, which is a small number itself. They produce more than half of a tiny number. Not enough to even be considered a legitimate sample size in any experiment. It's sad that your illogical paranoia continues to blind you to that fact.
isadore;1205043 wrote:They look for weak prey as wolves do, and then they kill it.
Blind assumptions delivered by illogical fear again. My dear man, I hope you do get over that soon. It appears to have consumed your ability to discern anything logical on the topic. What a shame.
Ah yes, there's that impeccable timing by those humans again. Always time to kill. Never time to eat. What precision in timing that must take.
And wait, I thought you said they sought out the weak, including infants. You know, inherently SMALL beings ... not large? Why aren't they eating the infants?
isadore;1205043 wrote:I realize you put your personal needs above the safety of the community.
Far less than any parent who allows his or her teen to get a driver's license. My community is a very safe place, as my dogs (even the ferocious wolf known as the chihuahua that lives in my home) are well-behaved and treated properly.
isadore;1205043 wrote:The fact that you would want a killer dog in your home to compensate for some personal shortcomings is both unbelievably self centered and self. Please reconsider
It's sad that you think any dog is a killer dog, particularly pit bulls, since there are more than 4.5 million registered pit bulls in the United States and many unregistered, yet there are barely enough deaths caused by dogs identified to be pit bulls each year to count on two full hands.
I would never have a killer dog in my home. It's just sad that a person like you is so blinded by his paranoia that he constructs monsters and boogie men in his head. Hopefully, one day you grow up and put such childish thoughts and fears behind you and realize how silly they are in light of logic.
isadore;1205043 wrote:you still can be redeemed.
I have been. Thank you.