|
The answer is the chicken if you believe in creationism, or the egg if you believe in evolutionism, it's that simple, I mean look at the words, they even begin with the same letter.
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 11:33
|
|
I can't get enough of are Dan 
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 12:55 |
|
|
the rooster
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 11:42
|
|
|
Egg.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 12:22
|
|
|
actually, IIRC the chicken came first. Cause even though it hatched from an egg that egg doesn't count as a chicken egg because it wasn't a chicken that laid it but a proto-chicken. So chicken comes out of Proto-CHicken egg, later lays the first chicken egg.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 12:24
|
|
|
hen
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 12:27
|
|
|
You dont recall correctly cause that first egg was a chicken egg a chicken came out no?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 12:29
|
|
|
unless it was both the first chicken born of nonchicken parents and suddenly a change from a species that gives birth to live young then it came from an egg before there were any chickens pretty dumb question i hope it doesnt catch on
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 12:29
|
|
|
Volume posted:actually, IIRC the chicken came first. Cause even though it hatched from an egg that egg doesn't count as a chicken egg because it wasn't a chicken that laid it but a proto-chicken. So chicken comes out of Proto-CHicken egg, later lays the first chicken egg. That kinda depends on whether you classify an egg as belonging to the species that laid it or the species that is hatching from it. Also, shut up nerd
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 12:30
|
|
|
velociraptor
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 12:30
|
|
|
Vashro posted:You dont recall correctly cause that first egg was a chicken egg a chicken came out no? No, it wasn't a chicken egg it was a proto-chicken egg. No chicken laid that egg so it's not a chicken egg.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 12:32
|
|
|
No never mind, all mighty Google just corrected mequote:So in a nutshell (or an eggshell, if you like), two birds that weren't really chickens created a chicken egg, and hence, we have an answer: The egg came first, and then it hatched a chicken.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 12:34
|
|
|
I spent about 10 minutes writing a serious reply about it. Then I realized that was dumb. I'm gay
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 12:36
|
|
|
OP nailed it in the first post.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 12:38
|
|
|
HJB posted:The answer is the chicken if you believe in creationism, or the egg if you believe in evolutionism, it's that simple, I mean look at the words, they even begin with the same letter. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 12:46
|
|
|
poo poo, I guess I'm a creationist now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 12:47
|
|
|
Volume posted:No, it wasn't a chicken egg it was a proto-chicken egg. No chicken laid that egg so it's not a chicken egg. The question was about the egg, not the chicken egg. Fish were laying eggs hundreds of millions of years before there were even birds, so the answer is "the egg"
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 12:49
|
|
|
lonesomedwarf posted:the rooster
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 13:09
|
|
|
Chickens are decedent from dinosaurs, who laid eggs. The egg came before the chicken. You're all stupid. Fatkraken posted:velociraptor Except this guy, he gets it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 13:14
|
|
|
there never was a first chicken. there was a long line of chicken-like generations, each belonging to the same species as its parents and offspring, accumulating small changes between every generation that ultimately ends in the modern day creature we call chicken. where in that line of birds we decide put the label of chicken is completely arbitrary and stems from our innate need to put everything into organized groups.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 13:18
|
|
|
LordArgh posted:there never was a first chicken. there was a long line of chicken-like generations, each belonging to the same species as its parents and offspring, accumulating small changes between every generation that ultimately ends in the modern day creature we call chicken. where in that line of birds we decide put the label of chicken is completely arbitrary and stems from our innate need to put everything into organized groups. No way, man. It's all about Punctuated Equilibrium. Long periods of stasis and a few rare and rapid periods of speciation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 13:49
|
|
|
you would have had to have self replicating molecules first, leading to rna then dna, then protocell encapsulation, etc. answer is chicken
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 13:57
|
|
|
Could we keep the protoexistentialistic sub-debate to a separate thread, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 14:00
|
|
|
alright hear me out: eggs are generally eaten at breakfast, while chicken as a general rule is more of a lunch or dinner food does it not logically follow that the egg came first? perhaps there is some innate subconscious knowledge that drives our eating habits
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 14:39
|
|
|
What if the chicken and the egg are in fact two different forms of the very same species?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 14:45
|
|
|
Yeah it was the egg.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 15:02
|
|
|
dinosaurs layed eggs and they were around before chicken
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 15:07
|
|
|
To help answer the question you can have sex with a chicken but the egg is a bit more difficult. With a little chicken fat you could shove the egg up your rear end.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 15:33
|
|
|
keep loving that chicken
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
there's never been an observed or recorded change from one species to another so this question really did make me think
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
I've never seen a monkey turn into a human.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
jneer posted:I've never seen a monkey turn into a human. if theres still monkeys why are there humans
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
um its a THEORY for a reason
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 16:41
|
|
|
like not even a fly has ever changed into a bigger different fly. Not once in all of recorded history edit: you just have to believe and maybe we'll see one change
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 16:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 12:55 |
|
|
I egged the chicken, and then I ate his leg.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 18:03
|
|
