For people that don't believe in evolution, if humankind can, in just twenty thousand years (or whatever), selectively breed into....?

Just a few precisions on your chronology:
- earliest proven domestic dog is 28,000 years old (sharing a human grave - his master? - and dog-like snout - not wolf-like anymore - )

- Black Sea catastrophic flood circa 6000 BC speculated origin of Gilgamesh Flood account later copy-pasted in Genesis.

That made 20,000 years of dog domestication and possible genetic selection.
If most modern dog breeds have been actively selected over the past 200 years, humans have always unintentionally selected desirable traits of their dogs.
We can identify different dog breeds existing 9000 years ago: sled dogs, small game hunting dogs, bear hunting dogs...

So, if Noah embarked his dogs, they could have come in several breeds.
anyway that's not important, because Black Sea event although catastrophic has been regional only: other dogs existed elsewhere. and since then we had plenty of time to recreate new breeds (stupid pet dogs...)...Show more

What Creationists believe, based on observational science and the Bible’s teaching, is that animals only reproduce after their “kind”—a taxonomic division generally broader than “species” (somewhere in the “family” or “genus” range). For example, all of the different dog species came from the dog kind (the canine family—canidae).

We can do a lot with artificial selection, but there are limits. For instance, you can’t breed a dog to the size of an elephant, much less turn it into an elephant. As the biologist, Dr. Ray Bohlin said, “For essentially every trait, although it usually harbors some variability, there has always been a limit. Whether the organisms or selected traits are roses, dogs, pigeons, horses, cattle, protein content in corn, or the sugar content in beets, selection certainly has an effect. But all selected qualities eventually fizzle out. Chickens don’t produce cylindrical eggs. We can’t produce a plum the size of a pea or a grapefruit. There are limits to how far we can go” (The Impotence of Darwinism).

There certainly seems to be a permanence of kinds. As zoologist Dr. Walter Veith has said of the fruit fly that’s been bred and mutated and bombarded with so many evolutionary processes (and we’ve produced all these different varieties and characteristics and deformities): “Nevertheless although bizarre forms have been created, the barrier, which constitutes ‘fruit flies,’ has never been broken.” Earlier he explained it like this, “Perhaps we can liken it to a piano; the keys on the piano are the genes, and the sequences in which the keys are played (the genes activated and expressed) provides the music (the variants). How many tunes can be played on the piano? An unlimited number, and therefore no two tunes need to be the same. However, one is restricted to piano music (the kind), and if one should wish to hear a different kind of sound one would have to play another instrument such as the violin” (The Genesis Conflict).

They have great variability and adaptability, but they are still dogs, fruit flies, and bacteria. And oh how they love to point to bacteria. But as Dr. Carl Wieland (who has degrees in medicine and surgery) has said, “Bacteria actually provide evidence against evolution. Bacterial populations multiply at incredibly high rates. In only a matter of a few years, bacteria can go through a massive number of generations, equivalent to millions of years in human terms. Therefore, since we see mutation and natural selection in bacterial populations happening all the time, we should see tremendous amounts of real evolution happening. However, the bacteria we have with us today are essentially the same as those described by Robert Koch a century ago. In fact, there are bacteria found fossilized in rock layers, claimed by evolutionists to be millions of years old, which as far as one can tell are the same as bacteria living today” (Superbugs Not Super After All).

They are great at adapting to their environment (like becoming resistant to antibiotics or altering their diet), but they are still bacteria and don’t change in their fundamental nature. And no matter what we do, they stay bacteria. As Dr. Berlinski has pointed out, we should have far more flexibility and plasticity under laboratory conditions than we actually do if Darwinian evolution were true. A good example is the work of Michigan State’s Richard Lenski on laboratory evolution of E. coli, which has shown trillions of bacteria evolving under selection for tens of thousands of generations yielding just broken genes and minor changes (in a word—more E. coli)....Show more

And not even young earth creationists doubt that a species can adapt. But a chihuahua might look different from a Newfie or a wolf, but they are still the same species and genetically still all compatible.
If it was just a matter of adapting until a mouse like creature looked like an elephant, they would still have the same chromosomal pairing and be genetically compatible.
Somehow, in evolution, they supposedly adapt so much, that the chromosome arrangement changes, significantly enough that the two species can not breed. So, at some point, an offspring must be born who can't breed with it's parent species, but enough of the mutated specimens exist to create a population.
This part of evolution has not been observed in nature. And further more, evolutionary scientists have actually debunked adaption as the driving force behind evolution over the past decade. You need to start reading more updated material....Show more

Selective breeding is an artificial acceleration of evolution from human intervention.

Evolution is not done intentionally by an intelligent supervisor, it is just random adaptations to survival on this planet. And yes species do change over time (either naturally through evolution or through humans doing selective breeding).

Is there a question in there somewhere?...Show more

Whatever floats your boat and makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside is ok with me...Show more