Post #1047 by Sherlock Holmes » Thu Mar 10, 2022 9:41 am
viewtopic.php?p=1070274#p1070274
Compare:Let's play a parlor game shall we? are these two related?
In the thread, “Evolution v Creationism: A Dead Issue”:
Post #264 by Sherlock Holmes » Thu Mar 10, 2022 10:16 am
viewtopic.php?p=1070281#p1070281
For any general observer of these debates, it might have become confusing as to which particular thread contained the issue of contrasting wolves and thylacines! I’m not sure why Sherlock Holmes didn’t simply link to the first post when he wanted to raise the issue in the second thread.Let's play a parlor game shall we? are these two related?
I note that both threads have garnered fairly detailed responses on the matter, despite being somewhat tangential to the debates going on at the time. I know I took a reasonable amount of time to consider my reply, and I’m sure others did too. I’m somewhat puzzled by the fact that, at 6:13 pm on Thu Mar 10, 2022, Sherlock Holmes said:
- and yet the “Evolution v Creationism: A Dead Issue” thread saw him posting again by 11:09 am on Sat Mar 12, 2022, and subsequently staying involved in the “A 6 Day Creation” thread and the “Bounded mutation” thread. Not to mention at least a couple of threads in the Christianity and Apologetics forum.Now that Facebook are openly allowing posts that call for violence against Russians, a level of depravity I hoped I'd never see, I'm taking some time away from all this.
The reason I bring this up is that before the whole ‘parlor game’ challenge was thrown into the mix, Sherlock Holmes back in post#248 here:
viewtopic.php?p=1070151#p1070151
said:
This claim was challenged by me, and evidence to the contrary was provided. No acknowledgement of that challenge was forthcoming, and I note that several other members here have voiced frustration with a similar pattern of behaviour from Sherlock Holmes: a consistent tactic of ‘dodging the issue’ when faced with some debate opponents.Well adaptive change is one thing, bacteria becoming mice is quite another.
As it happens, thylacines are mentioned in Dawkins’ excellent book, “The Greatest Show on Earth” on pages 300 to 301, when the author notes the prominent holes in the roof of the mouth of a thylacine skull – consistent with marsupials. There follows a number of comparisons between placental and marsupial mammals which show convergent evolution quite clearly. However, I’m not particularly sure that a debate about how we can test convergent evolution as a theory (both at the physical appearance level and the molecular DNA level) is what was really desired – despite duplicating the ‘parlor game’ challenge across two posts.
I’d like to think that all members here would respect the time and effort that their opponents put into their posts – and would acknowledge such, even if they don’t plan to engage further.