You're moving the goal posts, it is not about being completely different recipes. It's about being different dishes. They are different dishes.

My argument has not changed from my first comment. These were the last two sentences from it:

>If I start making pizzas in India and because mozzarella is hard to find here, just use processed cheese instead and may be put more chilis on top to suit Indian tastes, does the dish stop being pizza?

>There has to be some reasonable limitation on how little you modify something before you get to call it a new "invention".

How have I moved the goal post?

In fact I never called CTM and Butter Chicken the same dish - I called them virtually identical and too similar etc, it was a strawman you created and you then proceeded to say that I was moving the goal post when I reiterated my original position.

Please try to keep the quality of discussion higher. If I wanted to have endless discussions with argumentative people who have no ability to read, I would go on reddit.

> Can anybody of sound mind make the claim that they are completely different recipes?

!=

> Can anybody of sound mind make the claim that they are different recipes?

You seem to have it backwards, those were your words. Not mine. A little ironic for someone claiming I can't read, but alright. It would be nice if you could keep your emotions in check though, both for your and my sake.

I of course agree that they are similar, that is pretty evident. But that doesn't matter to call it a different dish, e.g. an egg sunny side up is a different dish compared to a scrambled egg even though the ingredients are exactly the same and it's prepared in the same way too, with the only difference being that the egg is mixed/destroyed.

For the sake of argument we can pretend that the sunny side up was invented in India, now a Taiwanese dude comes along and decides to scramble it. Is the new dish an Indian dish? I would disagree with that.