What’s different enough? There’s clearly physical differences of magnitude and measurement.
I’m saying dogs have “races” - yes, just as humans do. Whatever you call that grouping it is based on the comparison I made on my original post which is logically correct.
Don't know much biology, but appears "modern human biological variation is not structured into phylogenetic subspecies ('races'), nor are the taxa of the standard anthropological 'racial' classifications breeding populations."
"'Race' is a legitimate taxonomic concept that works for chimpanzees but does not apply to humans (at this time)."
You don’t need to be a biologist to know that when you bring a chihuahua to a dog park you go to the little fenced section compared to the bigger section for the bigger “breeds” and as a human you marvel at the sight and fact fact that they’re biologically the same species yet clearly with defined differences. Perception of reality allows you to infer boundaries and collections of similar things, words in a paper to justify what reality demonstrates physically and clearly is not only an appeal to authority and a fallacy of argument but it’s also meaningless as it’s out of context and can’t possibly refer to a shared experience of reality.
Human "races" are in not different enough to be called races from a scientific point of view.