There is greater DNA variation between jackals and coyotes than between a human and a chimpanzee.
Scoundrels play those sort of games. Particularly because you are either deliberately ignoring or simply unaware of the mutation that decreased the ability of a jackal (your gratuitous substitution for wolf/dog/dingo in my argument) to interbreed. There is more genetic variation within a family than there is between "races" yet it didn't stop the Evolutionists from caging up Ota Benga, a member of the Pygmy tribe, in a zoo as a sub human animal. Demonstrating yet again what happens when one combines stupidity, atheism and arrogance and misnames it "science".
Besides, you aren't helping your own argument. There is no case ever of a mutation adding genetic information. It was the mutation that made breeding certain animals together create infertile spawn. It was a mutation that divorced the Canis from the Canidae such where they lost abilities. When viewing the fact that mutations reduce viability and future genetic variability (ie small dogs lost the ability to procreate larger dogs), time is the enemy of the Evolutionist as compounding mutations leaves the Evolutionist with a genetically bankrupt sickly Poodle.
Do you see where that might be a problem to a thinking person?
Well can the condescending hypocrite realize that your own argument shouts louder against Evolution? Or is "thinking person" one who thinks that chimpanzees (48) and humans (46) have the same chromosome count while dogs (78), wolves (78), dingos(78) and coyotes(78) don't?
Where did the variation COME FROM?
You have no explanation.
Your ridiculous statements do not detract from the simple conclusion that you have explained no mechanism to describe an increase in genetic variation.
A jackal is less able than a dog or a coyote because of mutation? Less able to do what exactly?
So your mechanism whereby all canine species differentiated from a pair of dogs is mutation then?
Do you see where you accepting a mechanism that creates more genetic variation with numerous species arising from a single mated pair over a few thousand years, while rejecting the same mechanism being able to to create less variation between only two separate populations in several million years is an absolute disconnect to any thinking person?
Obviously not.
Interesting observation. Dog breeders started with some breed of larger dog and eventually came to the Chihuahua. Could a dog breeder go in reverse?