What came first the chicken or the egg?, page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times


reply posted on 14-9-2008 @ 06:10 PM by dave420
reply to post by nuke_c



Actually what came first was an almost-chicken, who laid an almost-chicken egg, which contained a chicken.


reply posted on 16-9-2008 @ 11:49 AM by beforetime
Originally posted by dave420
reply to
post by nuke_c



Actually what came first was an almost-chicken, who laid an almost-chicken egg, which contained a chicken.


so you say a whole..adult mutant chicken was born as a adult?

Because even a mutant baby..can't fend for itself.
and would have died way before it could have laid a egg.

just asking

[edit on 16-9-2008 by beforetime]



reply posted on 16-9-2008 @ 11:54 AM by beforetime
Originally posted by OnionCloud
reply to
post by beforetime



I'm really not sure what your post means. Try to reformulate it in to something coherent.


i will try to explain better..or coherent for you.

you said the egg came first.

i said that whole article on egg's you showed us...pertains to the idea it pass's threw a body or host.

therefore there is no way a egg could be first..if it has to come from a body as the source.
to start with.

now do you understand what i am saying?

have you ever seen a egg magically appear with no source ?
the egg layer.

but then again have i ever seen a chicken pop out of dirt or even a mutant one lol.
so i don't know lol
BTW.
There is no right or wrong answer..if so we would have already known the answer.
so don't get all bent out of shape plz lol

[edit on 16-9-2008 by beforetime]


reply posted on 16-9-2008 @ 12:10 PM by dave420
reply to post by beforetime



Your idea of "mutant" is probably more like Toxie the Toxic Avenger, whereas I am using it in the sense that we are all mutants - none of our DNA is exactly the same as our parents (as it can't be, as our DNA comes from two people who don't have identical DNA).

I'm saying that a creature similar to, but not genetically-identical to, a modern chicken, once laid an egg. In that egg was a chick, which now had all the genetic traits of the modern chicken. It was 99.99999999% the same as its parents (it wasn't green with extra wings and glowing eyes), so it would be as safe as any other chicken out there today.

In fact, we know this has happened, as we have chickens.


reply posted on 16-9-2008 @ 12:13 PM by dave420
reply to post by beforetime



There is a right answer, you just don't know it. It is somewhat arrogant to assume the entire world's knowledge resides in your head. The chicken/egg 'debate' is only interesting if you don't understand the theory of evolution. Once you do, it's obviously very easy.

Kind of like saying 'I don't know what 1,232,453,233,545,050 x 3,420 is, so therefore there is no answer'. Pretty silly, huh?


reply posted on 3-11-2008 @ 09:35 PM by megabyte
I saw a documentary about a French discovery of a butterfly bone in the base of the head that apparently tilts for no reason after so many generations producing a different angle of head to shoulders - form ape to human for example

I wish I had recorded the documentary because I could have given you the references to investigate this further

basically what I got form the doco is this

the zillions of genes in the genetic code that we think are not being used actually have instructions in them that might have gone a little like this

for the first 2 billion years the only creatures on earth were the trillobytes and after that some of the trillobytes gave birth to another sort of trillobyte that no longer could mate with the mother's generation of trillobytes so these became a seperate species. for the new species to be viable you would need a minimum of 200 individuals born at the same time.

the information is locked up in our genetic code and suddenly the instruction says that the offspring of the parents will now be a different species and the original species might continue or might not. The original species might have some offspring that are the new species and some offspring that are the old species.

You think about Darwin's theory of natural selection and it is truthful up to a point but we know that as soon as we humans have a baby with small mutations such as an extra chromosome, it is called down's syndrome and usually is also sterile [but not always] so deffinitely small mutations do not produce a completely seperate species - only a better adapted individual of its own kind.

for a new species to evolve it would take some instruction in the genetic code of parent species to suddenly breed enough offspring that cannot mate with the parent's species but can mate with others that were also born with that mutation.

therefore which came first - the chicken or the egg? the egg was laid by another species and brought up as one of its own and when all grown up formed a new colony of others who were also born to be the new type of hen or rooster.

a little like we transfer by IVF, embryos of endangered wild cat species to be gestated and born and mothered by domestic cats - but this is all coded in the DNA sequence so it happens naturally at some pre destined time that we dont fully understand as yet.

anyone else know the documentary i am referring to? I would love to watch it again


reply posted on 3-11-2008 @ 09:40 PM by rikk7111
reply to post by kinglizard



I'm in agreement with you kinglizard, not only is it the truth, but it could be the only way.............( and the people flame him alive for that remark)......IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII.


Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>    ^^TOP^^



EVOLUTION - Did YOU Know?
  Posted 16 days ago with 24 member flags
"I was raised an atheist"- Professor František Vyskočil
  Posted 6 days ago with 6 member flags
Evolution. Not a theory, but a fact!
  Posted 18 days ago with 4 member flags
Evolutionary theory: Gaps and not yet understood phenonemon
  Posted 17 days ago with 3 member flags