what came first? 🐔🍳?
Forums › General Discussion › what came first? 🐔🍳?-
Egg
-
Honeyyy wrote:
Thanks Honeyyy couldn't have put it better.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Does anyone argue against the fact that dinosaurs did layed eggs? So, to solve the initial question, the egg came first. No one specified if it was a chicken egg. Second, the theory of evolution has more facts closer to proving its theory exists as opposed to the theory that it was a *POOF* now there are humans situation.Hyena wrote:
No where Is that found in any serious research of microevolution.Eggs were laid by dinosaurs before Chickens. So the first chicken came from an egg.
It's same thing when asking the question; can the universe exist and not exist at the same time and the same way before man showed up? People don't have that ability to put themselves into existance neither can anything else.
-
C-Beazy wrote:
OMGosh evolution is fake. There hasn't been any useful mutations found yet. Monkeys have a DNA of 94% the same as humans which have about 2 billion base pairs. They have 120 million base pairs. Monkeys haven't been around for that long, and don't reproduce multiple times per year. Out of 127 diffrent dating methods only 9 show millions of years, the rest thousands. The fossil record doesn't show organisms changing into new organisms. A few atoms turned into an organism, wouldn't my household items evolve to then if they are much more complex? Sorry for bad grammar.
Then what did happen? Some old man thought, " I am board, I know, let's create life and watch it destroy itself, that will pass a few billian years."
Not likelyPersonally I aggrea with hyena
-
⚾sports lover ⚽ wrote:
But you need a chicken to lay an eggEgg
-
rojo2017 wrote:
roosters dont lay eggs... *facepalm*The roster, because without the roster there would be no egg.
-
Belial answered this question weeks ago.....
-
ᎯᏣᏋᏕ♠(add 068) wrote:
👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆Chuck norris
-
Mokokk wrote:
*sigh* 👉👌rojo2017 wrote:
roosters dont lay eggs... *facepalm*The roster, because without the roster there would be no egg.
-
Egg. How could the chicken be without the egg?
-
₳ƌժ: OTB'SPANTS wrote:
According to the theory of evolution, whatever laid the egg that the first chicken hatched out of was probably not a 100% chicken yet. It's offspring however was a chicken. So the egg came before the chicken
-
.................../ *_) rawr
..... _.----._/../
...../............./
__/..(...|.(...|
/__.-|_|--|_l -
Garry's Modder wrote:
Yup👍Fłtbürgęr3⃣8⃣™ wrote:
👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆The egg cuz u hav them fer breakfast and chicken u hav fer dinner/lunch
-
C-Beazy wrote:
If I gave you a sandwich that was 94% 💩and 6% ham, would you be prepared to call that a ham sandwich?OMGosh evolution is fake. There hasn't been any useful mutations found yet. Monkeys have a DNA of 94% the same as humans which have about 2 billion base pairs. They have 120 million base pairs. Monkeys haven't been around for that long, and don't reproduce multiple times per year. Out of 127 diffrent dating methods only 9 show millions of years, the rest thousands. The fossil record doesn't show organisms changing into new organisms. A few atoms turned into an organism, wouldn't my household items evolve to then if they are much more complex? Sorry for bad grammar.
-
C-Beazy wrote:
OMGosh evolution is fake. There hasn't been any useful mutations found yet. Monkeys have a DNA of 94% the same as humans which have about 2 billion base pairs. They have 120 million base pairs. Monkeys haven't been around for that long, and don't reproduce multiple times per year. Out of 127 diffrent dating methods only 9 show millions of years, the rest thousands. The fossil record doesn't show organisms changing into new organisms. A few atoms turned into an organism, wouldn't my household items evolve to then if they are much more complex? Sorry for bad grammar.
Wow, i'm not sure where to start with this. First, monkeys are not the same as apes. To have an intelligent conversation about this you might want to learn the difference.
-
Second, reproduction is a requirement for evolution. Unless I'm mistaken, no one has caught the toaster F'in the oven to produce the toaster-oven. So the answer is no, your household items do not evolve in the way living organisms do. Read a book, man. And not the "good book." that's just stories compiled by men to control sheep.
-
Mokokk wrote:
Roosters shag chickens to make eggs facepalmrojo2017 wrote:
roosters dont lay eggs... *facepalm*The roster, because without the roster there would be no egg.
-
spooons wrote:
Ok fine what were 98% the same only 20million base pair diffrence. If we reproduce once every 10 years, with a useful mutation, and no mistakes that'd be 200 million years. That's not counting only 9 of the 127 dating methods say over millions, and billions and not thousands of years that the Earth existed. If I'm making uninteligent posts please destroy my logic. Also one more thing, how do a few atoms in a puddle get struck by lightning become amino acids and be life. Don't we still need a cell to produce proteins?C-Beazy wrote:
Wow, i'm not sure where to start with this. First, monkeys are not the same as apes. To have an intelligent conversation about this you might want to learn the difference.
-
The Right Hand wrote:
No the egg!THE CHICKEN!!!!!!!!🐔🐔🐔🐔🐔🐔🐔🐔🐤🐤🐤🐔🐔🐔🐤🐤🐤🐔🐔🐔🐔🐔
-
Egg. Because before the first chicken was an almost-chicken, and a mutation in thr dna made almost-chickens chick the first chicken.
-
Ok this is a two way answer but there couldn't be a chicken without an egg and there couldn't be a egg without the chicke. If you believe the big bang theory (good show btw) then there ya go :P
-
🅱🅾🅰 🔥Achilles🔥 wrote:
Ok this is a two way answer but there couldn't be a chicken without an egg and there couldn't be a egg without the chicke. If you believe the big bang theory (good show btw) then there ya go :P
You are such a moron.
But the big bang theory is good. Sad thing is I know what they are talking about :(
-
C-Beazy wrote:
That's just not even what happened AT ALL. Unless you've done some extremely in-depth research, or have taken some college-level life science courses, you can't fully understand the theory of evolution. Especially if you don't believe in evolution to begin with, because your opinion is already biased.spooons wrote:
✂C-Beazy wrote:
✂
Also one more thing, how do a few atoms in a puddle get struck by lightning become amino acids and be life. Don't we still need a cell to produce proteins? -
I mean, would it be logical for me to say that there's no bad side-effects to marijuana, because you don't lung cancer or anything from it? No, because I didn't do the research or learn that it kills thousands of brain cells, causes memory loss, etc. Maybe (hypothetically, of course) I have some pot-head buddies that tell me using it's fine, and seem to still be pretty smart. It's not that I (or anyone that does jump to conclusions) is stupid for believing what they do, just that they lack the knowledge to make accusations or false claims such as these. They don't understand the concept fully enough to be able to state absolutes, and especially if they've been influenced socially, culturally, or by family to believe in specific ways.
-
I'm not calling you dumb. I don't understand how someone could not believe in evolution, (but then again, I know a ton about it, and I find it fascinating) but I'm not going to try to convince you that it's real. You'll believe what you believe, and I'll believe what I believe, and I acknowledge the fact that I probably won't change your mind, and you definitely won't change mine. So I won't argue and call you an idiot, but I will say that you can't act like you know all there is to know about evolution, especially if you're so against it already that you obviously don't have any interest in learning about it at all. No interest=you don't know much about it, because nobody learns about crap they have no interest in.
-
SeñoritaMafioso wrote:
How does the theory of evolution state life's origins. No matter what unless it's math your going to have a bias towards or against something. Also can you guys use SCIENCE to prove me wrong because no one gas yet. Please stop avoiding what I'm asking.C-Beazy wrote:
That's just not even what happened AT ALL. Unless you've done some extremely in-depth research, or have taken some college-level life science courses, you can't fully understand the theory of evolution. Especially if you don't believe in evolution to begin with, because your opinion is already biased.spooons wrote:
✂C-Beazy wrote:
✂
Also one more thing, how do a few atoms in a puddle get struck by lightning become amino acids and be life. Don't we still need a cell to produce proteins? -
SeñoritaMafioso wrote:
I have to learn algebra and I have no interest in it... 😜I'm not calling you dumb. I don't understand how someone could not believe in evolution, (but then again, I know a ton about it, and I find it fascinating) but I'm not going to try to convince you that it's real. You'll believe what you believe, and I'll believe what I believe, and I acknowledge the fact that I probably won't change your mind, and you definitely won't change mine. So I won't argue and call you an idiot, but I will say that you can't act like you know all there is to know about evolution, especially if you're so against it already that you obviously don't have any interest in learning about it at all. No interest=you don't know much about it, because nobody learns about crap they have no interest in.
-
C-Beazy wrote:
You have dragged this back to a religion based argument, without actually mentioning god I am impressed.SeñoritaMafioso wrote:
SnippedC-Beazy wrote:
Snippedspooons wrote:
✂C-Beazy wrote:
✂
As SeñioritaMafioso put so eloquently we will never be able to convince you because it is a theory. A theory that we have faith in, just as you have faith in your book and beliefs. We will not try to convince you here as it is not worth wasting our time or yours on an argument that can never be won.
Unfortunately for you Belial has retired.
Accordingly, we ask that you respect our right to our beliefs the same as you have your beliefs.
-
Hyena wrote:
I was just stating stuff about evolution, I guess I just got to passionate about it and spewed it out, along with code punching tonight I'll also do more research. Sorry for lack of periods.C-Beazy wrote:
You have dragged this back to a religion based argument, without actually mentioning god I am impressed.SeñoritaMafioso wrote:
SnippedC-Beazy wrote:
Snippedspooons wrote:
✂C-Beazy wrote:
✂
Accordingly, we ask that you respect our right to our beliefs the same as you have your beliefs.
-
The Primordial Soup Theory is what you're thinking about, with the lightning and all. Evolution does not attempt to explain the origins of life, it merely explains the variations of species and how new species come to be. I personally believe in God-driven-Evolution. He wanted us here, so we evolved.... And it was good. I just don't believe in the Bible, as those are just the words of men. And I love theological/scientific arguements... Anytime, anywhere.
-
You're way over thinking this. C comes before E in the dictionary therefore the chicken comes first. Or being the egg can't move, the chicken is the only possible one who can come... So the chicken wins 2 to 0.
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC