Eurasian Grey Wolf Supremacism

A hybrid between a wolf and a German Shepherd

A recent study has revealed that there has been recurrent mating between dogs and wolves throughout Eurasia:

The international study showed that around 60 per cent of Eurasian grey wolf genomes carried small blocks of the DNA of domestic dogs, suggesting that wolves cross-bred with dogs in past generations.

The results suggest that wolf-dog hybridisation has been geographically widespread in Europe and Asia and has been occurring for centuries.

Researchers examined DNA data from grey wolves — the ancestors of the domestic dog — to determine how much their gene pool was diluted with the DNA of domestic canines, and how widespread the process of hybridisation is.

In other words, the researchers tried to find out how “impure” the Eurasian Grey Wolf has become due to introgression of domestic canine genes.

The researchers discovered that many grey wolves are in fact genetically-impure and that even coming up with a definition for a “pure” grey wolf is problematic as a result. They emphasize however that the presence of some dog genes does not make wolf populations any less genetically-distinguishable and that conservation efforts to maintain wolf populations’ integrity and genetic purity remain meaningful:

We found that while hybridisation has not compromised the genetic distinctiveness of wolf populations, a large number of wild wolves in Eurasia carry a small proportion of gene variants derived from dogs, leading to the ambiguity of how we define genetically “pure wolves”.

Our research highlighted that some individual wolves which had been identified as “pure wolves” according to their physical characteristics were actually shown to be of mixed ancestry. On the other hand, two Italian wolves with an unusual, black coat colour did not show any genetic signatures of hybridisation, except for carrying a dog-derived variant of a gene linked to dark colouration. This suggests that the definition of genetically “pure” wolves can be ambiguous and identifying admixed individuals can be difficult, implying that management strategies based on removal of suspected hybrids from wolf populations may be inefficient.

Instead, our study has highlighted a need to reduce the factors which can cause hybridisation, such as abundance of free-ranging dogs, small wolf population sizes, and unregulated hunting.

Dogs and wolves are thought to have split into separate evolutionary paths between 14,000 and 6,400 years ago, another example of rapid biological evolution over a relatively small number of generations, albeit under human impetus.

One wonders what the authors think about efforts to preserve the integrity of human subspecies, a precious inheritance which has emerged through tens of thousands of years of regional evolution.

Certainly, in the case of wolves and dogs, the composition of the gene pool is never considered a matter of indifference. If the wolf gene pool were overwhelmed through interbreeding with dogs, the species would go extinct.

The presence of wolf genes in canine pets is also something which cannot be ignored, even if dogs and wolves share over 99.8% of their DNA. That 0.2% genetic difference makes for an enormous phenotypic difference. The authorities generally advise against or outright ban the ownership of wolf-dog hybrids as pets. Wolf-dogs tend to be more shy and aggressive, although the temperament of a particular individual is more difficult to predict than for either wolves or pure-bred dogs. Because of their genetic diversity, wolf-dogs have more temperamental diversity and there is no telling what particular set of wolf/dog genes a particular wolf-dog has inherited from its parents. One dog writer noted:

Legal or not, wolfdogs pose significant behavioral challenges for owners . . . Like Pit Bulls and pornography, wolfdogs can be tough to identify, regardless of laws passed to limit them. . . . Of course, not all wolfdogs behave the same way, and there’s probably more variety in behavior among wolfdogs than any other kind of dog.

Species and subspecies tend to be fuzzy around the edges, but that does not make them any less real. Small genetic differences, even of a few percentiles of a percentile, can lead to enormous phenotypic differences (which, as E. O. Wilson has pointed out in Sociobiology, can in turn be magnified into even great social and cultural differences). All this is as true for humans as for canines or any other animal.

31 replies
    • James Bowery
      James Bowery says:

      As coevolution with wolves to produce dogs played an important role in the creation of Euroman, that video of dog slaughter illustrates, whatever the cause, Asians likely did not go through that coevolution to nearly the degree. The mystery of East-West difference will never be significantly fathomed without understanding how that difference in canine-man coevolution came about.

      PS: Videos like this have been done of slaughter houses in the West and they, too, are emotionally disturbing — but not to this degree.

      • curri
        curri says:

        NYRB just put up a review of some recent books on human-canine co-evolution:
        http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2018/04/05/raised-by-wolves/

        And most intriguingly, why did modern man, who coexisted with wolves after humans left Africa 60,000 years ago, not form a bond until 30,000–40,000 years ago, after they entered Europe? An important clue may exist in the nature of those first Europeans, for they were very unusual hybrid beings that resulted from the interbreeding of Neanderthals and humans. Until new migrations arrived in Europe 14,000 years ago, Europeans had a high proportion (around 8 percent) of Neanderthal genes, a figure that in modern populations is reduced to around 2 percent. As the well-documented phenomenon of hybrid vigor illustrates, hybrids can be highly distinctive, exhibiting characteristics seen in neither parent, and it is worth investigating the possibility that the Neanderthal/human hybrids interacted with canids in novel ways that led to domestication.

        Genetic studies of wolves and dogs indicate that their lineages split between 30,000 and 40,000 years ago, and the limited archaeological evidence suggests that the split occurred in Europe. Cattle, sheep, goats, and pigs were all first domesticated much later—beginning around 10,500 years ago—in the Near East. The realization that humans and dogs have been companions for at least 30,000 years has prompted a reconsideration not only of the relationships’ origins, but also of its consequences.

        • James Bowery
          James Bowery says:

          This 2016 paper does not detect substantial genetic difference that far back but, instead, attributes exceptional “phenotypic plasticity” to the earliest coevolution.

          In any event, it is now pretty clearly the case that the “capture the culture” crowd are starting to detect the importance of spinning the story, as there is now a movie called “Alpha” that attempts to portray the origin of the relationship — interestingly in conjunction with the Solutrean hypothesis.

          White nationalists really need to get ahead of this because understanding the culture that selected for Euroman’s characteristics is to be the star by which we find our way home: Culture as artificial selection.

          We must not be satisfied with “preservation of the white race” — we must institute a culture that selects for the characters we most value about the white race lest we lose the race in our defensive efforts. Preserving the white race means selecting for that which we value most. That is to be our moral foundation.

          • James Bowery
            James Bowery says:

            Reading further into that NYTBR, my fears about the “capture the culture” folks are confirmed: They are imputing missing data in a way that is both unreasonable and supportive of cultural Marxism. They are on top of this. It might seem paranoid of me to suggest that my Red Ice interview on Jewish virulence (particularly starting after 47 min mark) triggered a cultural Marxist reaction on this front. But about one year later, one of the Hughes Brothers (movies like American Pimp, From Hell, etc.) announced he had written and was making a film named “The Solutrean to Alpha”. The name was changed to “Alpha” in 2017. It is now scheduled for release this September in 3D and IMAX. Now this, apparently cultural Marxist spin control, has come out.

            I had already begun a screenplay portraying my best guess imputation of this origin story for Euroman when I discovered the production had started on “The Solutrean to Alpha” — recognizing how crucial is a creation myth to any culture. By permitting others to define our creation myth for us, we are permitting them to define our culture as whites and they will do what they always do to us with that privilege: Create a religion for us that enslaves us to their interests.

            Another reason for me to be “paranoid” is that just a couple of weeks before the highly influential essay “The Flight 93 Election” hit the news and altered the narrative of Trump supports from Trump-worshiping gap-tooth hicks to desperate heroics in the face of otherwise certain death, I published my own “Flight 93 Election” essay which I reprint below to illustrate the “coincidence” that, among other things, leads me to believe my ideas are being “watched”:

            James Bowery
            August 22, 2016
            You want a stark picture of what’s going on with “all these stupid crazy Trump supporters”? Here’s a little parable, having interacted with public policy think tanks connected to the Ivy League in the process of getting NASA to stop competing with private launch services before it was popular, being accused of being a “kook” for doing it, succeeding and then proposing further policy changes to enhance private investment in advanced technology and being accused of being a “kook” for that too:

            A 747 is flying over the Rockies. The captain is more than a little arrogant. He doesn’t like what his instruments have been telling him. He instructs a flight engineer to adjust the instruments. This goes on for a while.

            Meanwhile, many of the passengers are looking out the window. They see Pikes Peak rising up in front of them at an ever increasing angle and speed. Others have their headsets on watching the in-flight movie. Most of them have seen it before but it relieves the boredom. The ones looking out the window start getting nervous. Most aren’t “jet set” types, which is why they’re looking out the window. They don’t want to appear to be rubes to the jaded sophisticates who are completely calm, let alone cause a panic that might get them in trouble, so they keep quiet. Several make some noise but are quieted down by the flight attendants. A reassuring voice of authority comes over the intercom from a flight attendant admonishing everyone to calm down — the pilot knows what he’s doing. Some with their headphones on roll their eyes, wishing they’d paid the extra money for first class so they could be away from the hoi polloi.

            A minute passes…

            Then two passengers get up and run for the cabin. They’re physically restrained by flight attendants with the help of some passengers. The captain’s voice comes over the intercom, more authoritative and a bit disdainful about people who don’t know anything about instrument flight putting other passengers in danger.

            Chortles about the “rubes” start echoing down the rows.

            Another minute passes..

            Finally, an older man who knows a little bit about flying has been looking out the window through all this. He has a private pilot’s license. Like the captain, he is arrogant. He decides he _knows_ something’s wrong with the pilot. He gets up and knowing a confrontation is imminent, he rallies the “rubes” to him by confirming their fears. He says he’s flown his own plane and that it’s time to storm the cabin and take control of the 747 before it craters in the Rockies.

            All Hell breaks loose as he’s shouted down as not knowing anything about instrument flying a 747 and that his arrogant “demagoguery” is putting everyone on the flight in grave danger. Many of the less sophisticated passengers are wannabe sophisticates. They have been sharing in the chortles at those from whom they wish to distance themselves. Emboldened by their contempt of the “stupid crazy rubes”, they decide to preemptively attack them. Visions of Flight 93 to the tune of Neil Young’s “Let’s Roll” inspire them as they get into fist fights.

            A mutiny of the passengers is imminent. The Air Marshal and pilot, a Federal Flight Deck Officer himself, draw their firearms and prepare for the worst.

            Tune in next time for the exciting conclusion to this parable.

            PS: This monkeying with the “instruments” of public policy think tanks and academic social sciences, not to mention government data gathering and analysis, has been going on for decades.

  1. Hipster Racist
    Hipster Racist says:

    There is a reason they are called “liberal creationists.” The “official doctrine” about race is simply a denial of basic biology and evolution.

    The “race is a social construct” canard has become extremely embarrassing due to the rapid advances in genetics over the last several decades. Even the New York Times is now trying to backtrack after years of pushing anti-scientific nonsense:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/23/opinion/sunday/genetics-race.html

  2. Sophie Johnson
    Sophie Johnson says:

    ‘Small genetic differences … can lead to enormous phenotypic differences … All this is as true for humans as for canines or any other animal.’
    I suppose one can allow that this is broadly true for canines. But it is not easy to allow that it is true for all animals. Looking at the wild felines, for instance, we do not expect to spot a lion and tiger cross, nor a cheetah and leopard cross, for we know that the wild felines do not cross-breed. So for them, there are no genetic differences that result in phenotypic differences. There are for people and dogs, for we can distinguish races and species, and we easily spot the miscegenated people and mongrel dogs.
    Dogs and we have no wild feline instinct that universally declines to mate with the phenotypically different. Pity, for if we had such an instinct, we should not have to worry about the extinction of any of our races, and none of us would be accused of being a racist.
    But despair not. There’s hope for the wild felines. We can tell the antifa just how radically catscist those cats are, and cheer them on as they dash out into the jungle with their ‘piss off catscist’ placards, and clutching their bottled body fluids to chuck at every tomcatscist and his catscist gal.
    Ahhh … the antifa are few, fewer, fewest, gone. Hope not Antifa!

  3. pterodactyl
    pterodactyl says:

    With intense breeding, humans have over the decades produce the aggressive fighting pitbull and the friendly labrador (used to guide the blind) from the same original gene pool. What these animals prove is that different breeds have different behaviour patterns from their wiring ie their genes. A pitbull pup brought up in a loving home with labradors will not end up like a labrador. Hence the saying ‘a leopard cannot change its spots’.

    The modern establishment does not like such scientific facts, as it makes it harder for them to issue decrees to Nature to order Nature never, ever to do the same with humans – ie different human ‘breeds’ are not allowed to have genetic differences in behaviour – it is illegal and in violation of all the equality and diversity legislation. (The same applies to male/female differences in behaviour – not allowed to be different either). Nature is not allowed to disobey the legislation of the Left.

    Incidentally, there is no ‘evolution’ occurring here with dog breeding (and none is claimed, but it is worth mentioning), just selection of different gene types from the gene pool. (Evolution requires another component: new genes, but this is not needed to explain the differences in the dogs. After a natural disaster the different breeds mix up the genes again, so the dalmations etc do not last long as a separate group).

    So when the lecturer says to the students that all human races are the same in behaviour, or when the lecturer says there are no innate differences in the wiring between men and woman as regards behaviour, the question is, how do the ‘intellectual’ students react?

    80% lower their eyes and say nothing. This is not the same as agreeing. This is submission to the dominant culture, even when they know it is a lie and false. This 80% are submitting to the current aggressive and dominant culture of self-hate. As for the other 20% who nod approvingly – they are nodding because they approve of the message, not because they believe it to be valid.

    Back to the dalmations being submerged when the packs get together. The good news is that the dalmations COULD be re-bred from the mixed up mongrel dog that results from interbreeding. All it requires is for natural selection to apply again.

    PS the Daily Mail (Britain’s biggest Daily paper, with a conservative readership but still 100% politically correct) are going into overdrive in the last few days over a few hundred protesters in London protesting about anti-Semitism. It seems that the Jews supporting Labour over the decades and helping Labour with their plans for this country regarding immigration from the third world – it seems that all this help they gave Labour has not made Labour friendly towards them.

    • T. J.
      T. J. says:

      It is poorly understood- the degeneracy of modern philosophy.

      I refer you to American Pragmatism. Pragmatism teaches that reality can be bent. . .yes, this so-called philosophy is hard-care mysticism, mind over matter hogwash. The main reality bender is progressive legislation. . .a song from the sixties- “… I can’t twist the truth, it knows no regulation,
      Handful of Senators don’t pass legislation,
      And marches alone can’t bring integration. . .” [Eve of Destruction]

      “. . .it is illegal and in violation of all the equality and diversity legislation. . .”
      [quote from above]. No laughing matter- I glanced through a law book written around 1943. It asserted that the laws of government are equal to the laws of nature! Passing laws really does alter reality! That’s where libs get their psycho ideas. . .

    • Charlie
      Charlie says:

      Science and Physics are not absolute and can be changed by legislation.
      For Example: On 9/11 jet fuel melted steel, steel and concrete buildings can burn and fall straight down in to their own footprint. Three buildings can fall when only two are struck by phantom airliners. Inexperienced pilots can make sophisticated flying look easy. Billions in bullion can disappear without a trace. etc.

      Hoaxes: 6 Million can be toasted and not affect the overall population numbers. 6 Million can be toasted using resources that don’t exist. 6 Million can vanish without a trace. Nazis are diabolical and can supercede any laws of physics. All Germans are Nazis.

      Slavery: 0.01% of the population can own slaves but the entire race is complicit. Slaves can later become the impetus for an entire nation being built on their backs.

      Nations: One only nation is a GREAT Nation and that is where God’s Chosen Chosenites live.

      • pterodactyl
        pterodactyl says:

        Charlie – I can agree with most but not the first paragraph, but it is worth pointing out that only the first paragraph conspiracy theory is ‘allowed’ to be discussed. Fires do melt steel, and we have films of the jets crashing into the buildings. We also have a motive for why these arabs did it – they actually told us their motive. And we have film of their supporters in arab countries all over the world cheering and thus proving that it was indeed something they approve of. If it suited the Jewish agenda (it did not, as it made voters more opposed to immigration from these places) then you have to explain why the MSM does not show any videos of people jumping out. The reason is, the elite do not want the people to be reminded of the horror in case it turns the people against mass immigration from these countries. The same reason they never show films of the black riots in the MSM where they kept attacking white people – such film will turn the people against their agenda, which is why the MSM never show it. On the other hand the MSM will show a white cop shooting a black criminal all day long.

        TJ – it is amusing that they actually printed it in black and white

        • Charlie
          Charlie says:

          We also have films of Bibi Netanyahu saying that it was good for IsraHell. We also know that Larry Silverstein bought the towers weeks before. We also know that he said to “pull” the third tower. We also know that Larry Silverstein was the only building owner to ever cash in on insurance for a so called “terrorist attack”. We also know that most all terrorism originates in Tel Aviv. We also know jews have been terrorists since Jesus Christ’s time. We also know jews are demons and lie, cheat, steal and murder to gain a percentage over the Goyish.

  4. Irene
    Irene says:

    Eurasianism is the key to understand what’s going on in Europe: Both Merkel and Putin strive for the same goal: A borderless mongrel (though far more impure than the grey wolf) eurasian empire stretching from Lisbon to Vladivostok; they only disagree on the methodology to achieve their goal.
    Merkel wants to integrate asiatic Russia into Europe; Hitler wanted to wipe out asiatic Russia.
    Russians (and many others) deeply resent and envy Western superiority and will do everything to destroy us Westerners.
    The russian media in Russia (like in soviet times!) is all about demonising the West which they portray is a dangerous place full of criminals, homosexuels, terrorists…Just like the North Korea media.
    Expect more trouble with that evil empire!

      • Karen T
        Karen T says:

        1 Putin supports the Orthodox Church, which unlike Western Christianity, hasn’t been subverted.
        2 Putin cleaned up the mess created by the drunkard Yeltsin who was controlled by the thieving semibankirschina (seven bankers) six of whom were Jewish.
        3 Putin arrested or exiled Jewish oligarchs, unlike the West. Israel celebrates them on a t.v. show…https://www.haaretz.com/.premium-meet-israel-s-russian-oligarchs-1.5290286
        4 Putin is not about to share Russias abundant natural resources, oil, gas, and coal that the West is running low on.
        5 Putin is a Nationalist, not a Globalist.
        6 The Jews don’t control Putin.

      • Lucy
        Lucy says:

        @Trenchant. This Irene person does single her out as a fervent Russo-phobe; to express it gently.

      • Irene
        Irene says:

        It’s your right to support Stalinism Trenchant!
        We’re not in Russia where criticism of Stalin, besides being taboo, is strictly verboten.
        The Russians just banned “the death of Stalin”, a harmless british comedy about the power struggle following Stalin’s death.
        The reaction of the russian politicians once again showed their true colors – as in red. Culture minister Vladimir Medinsky condemned the comedy as “an insult that should not be shown in Russia, the most sickning film about the USSR in recent times, a comedy that Hitler could have written.” Putin’s speaker called the movie “complete rubbish; the film makers turned a tragic and heroic time in our countrie’s history into cheap barter. Idiots!”
        Red but not dead!

        • Joseph Gulliver
          Joseph Gulliver says:

          I think that the banning of this film (which I have seen) is seen by the Russians as insulting to their nation and history. They don’t see Stalin through the eyes of the west as a bloodthirsty dictator but as the leader when they had their finest hour (defeating Hitler). Russia has always been a dictatorship and Stalin was just another in a long line of despots. It will take a long time for the Russians to see Stalin for what he really was. It would require a complete overhaul of their educational system and national outlook. Their inability to see Stalin and those around him as the bloodthirsty despots that they really were is similar to the Japanese refusing to admit the crimes that were perpetrated by them against the Chinese and Koreans in WW2. If they were forced to do so it would cause them to prostrate themselves before the world and face enormous shame and humiliation. Look at what this has done to Germany! Do we want this for the Japanese and the Russians? I think not, they are still societies with a sense of who they are. Germany has been stripped of everything and the only identities they are allowed to keep is their beer culture and folk dances. The essence of German-ness has been stripped away. Let the Russians be Russian, let the Japanese be Japanese. If the Russians don’t want this Monty Pythonesque film with it’s over the top violence and non-stop profanity shown in their country, it’s fine with me.

    • Curmudgeon
      Curmudgeon says:

      “The russian media in Russia (like in soviet times!) is all about demonising the West which they portray is a dangerous place full of criminals, homosexuels, terrorists…”
      Well the (((West))) may not be FULL of criminals etc, but there are way too many of them.
      Would anyone feel safe in Detroit, Baltimore, or DC? Back in the 70s Glasgow was considered the most violent city in Europe, but I felt safer there than in Chicago. I have avoided London and Paris for almost 20 years, after seeing them turn into cesspits through the diversity agenda. These days, I’m not sure I would want to return to Oslo or Copenhagen, and Malmo is out of the question. Of course none of the above are dangerous, and certainly have no criminals, homosexuals or terrorists.

  5. T
    T says:

    They freely acknowledge biology in the animal kingdom and go to the greatest lengths to preserve ‘diversity’ in all its forms and expression, sparing no expense or trouble to do so. Meanwhile, on the esoterically themed late night talk shows there is the greatest concern expressed by callers that hypothetical aliens (ET’s) might be attempting to ‘hybridize’ humanity by ‘abducting’ young men and women and mixing them sexually with these aliens so as to weaken and enslave mankind.

    And yet right in front of peoples eyes, the elephant in the living room so to speak, you have some very powerful non-hypothetical forces doing everything they can to rid humanity of its diversity by pushing ‘mixing’ and the resulting hybridization of the races of man. The powerful elements of the elites of the Anglo-Saxon and Jewish peoples and their hangers on, self described ‘progressives’, very much unlike the hypothetical space aliens are known for a fact to have been heavily involved historically with chattel slavery and its trade, as well as its monetization since, ie wage slavery by way of the cheap labor/mass immigration system. Being that these ‘progressives’ whose political and spiritual forebears not only owned slaves themselves, but more importantly were the slave dealers and merchandisers which entails the breeding of slaves for various purposes, and that as chattel slavery was not abolished but rather monetized manifesting as wage slavery, they did not reform. Folks should be gravely concerned about these unreformed slavers enslaving man by reducing most to the status of the ten cents an hour everyday Chinese laborer, but without even having the comfort of a homeland or a race, which (for the moment) the Chinese presently enjoy.

    The present day powers that be seem to see man as being wholly outside of nature, yet man is a part of nature and one overlooks that at their peril.

    • Karen T
      Karen T says:

      It could be that dogs and wolves were handsome and majestic creatures to begin with. I’m a German Russian hybrid and in my salad days I was considered a great beauty.

  6. The Mechanic
    The Mechanic says:

    Researchers at Swansea University, UK and Uppsala University in Sweden built a mathematical model that explains how one single sheepdog can round up herds made of up to 100 sheep. Their conclusion suggests that the dog needs only to follow two simple mathematical rules. One causes a sheepdog to close any gaps it sees between dispersing sheep – in fact this is sort of where the key lies; the dog doesn’t see the sheep per se. The dog doesn’t distinguish the fluffy white balls in front of him as individual sheep and what it notices are only the gaps that form in an otherwise white sea. The other rule results in sheep being driven forward once the gaps are sufficiently closed.
    https://www.zmescience.com/science/math/sheepdog-herd-432432/

Comments are closed.