Hi Randman,
I'm going to do something that long experience has taught me is almost never successful: spend some time explaining to you where, in my opinion (one of the one's that counts around here), you are going wrong, in the hopes that it will allow discussions in which you participate to proceed more smoothly and constructively.
I said:
I suppose it's too late now, but replying to 10 or 20 old posts in a thread, some of which you already replied to more than 50 messages ago, is likely to sow more confusion than anything else.
You replied:
Are you asking me, after writing such long posts, to address and make sure others address the specific factual issues, that I should ignore responses from people?
That would seem a little disingenious on my part?
If this is assent, I can't tell. Most people upon seeing such a message from a moderator would reply along the lines of, "I was trying to be sure I didn't ignore any responses, but I can see where replying to posts near the thread's beginning might be confusing." It raises moderators concern level a great deal when you respond to requests with what appears to be argument. Rather than explain and explain, which as I've said almost never works, now we just suspend and suspend.
Evos claim fossil rarity on this thread but offer near no actual analysis to explain how some species can have thousands of fossils and other aquatic and semi-aquatic species, thousands most likely, apparently never fossilized or we have none.
This is a point which needs to be explored more thoroughly. Others in this thread believe you are dismissing what they're telling you based upon nothing more than personal skepticism. Your tendency to often restate your conclusions without having settled this point makes it seem to people that you're not listening.
Moving on to your next message,
Message 124:
At best, Pakicetus could be an ancestral form to whales, but imo, that is highly dubious, but the debate is really about the degrees of fossilized forms found compared to how many should have existed and how many should have been found.
I would make the same point as before: to people here you appear to be dismissing their counterarguments while frequently repeating your conclusions, which are based upon an unsettled point. Again, it makes it seem like you're not listening.
If you keep insisting you're right and then moving on while the issue is still in dispute, then this thread has little chance of success. I can tell by your tone that you think your reasoning sound, but the actual test of sound reasoning is that it make sense to other people, not just to you.
| -- | Percy |
| | EvC Forum Director |
™ Version 4.2
