What do you think came first? The chicken or the egg?

[CoopCrazy]

Quote:
Thats basiccaly what i am saying.. It would have to be something between a dino and a chicken, the egg would still have to come first even though it came out of (dinchik) because the chick that hatched from the egg would be the first real chicken..

I mean I didnt think that a trex laid a chicken egg!

But its true... Something right before the chicken would have had to have laid the egg the produced the chicken we know today..

Thats it.. Just to make my chickens THAT much cooler Im calling them my modern day dinosaurs

Love it ... lol

 

[ChickyLaura]

Ack! I just think the chicken came first because of dinosaurs and evolution and all of that. But since I wasn't there, I'm only making a guess! Ha ha!

 

[deb1]

Quote:
Thats basiccaly what i am saying.. It would have to be something between a dino and a chicken, the egg would still have to come first even though it came out of (dinchik) because the chick that hatched from the egg would be the first real chicken..

I mean I didnt think that a trex laid a chicken egg!

But its true... Something right before the chicken would have had to have laid the egg the produced the chicken we know today..

Thats it.. Just to make my chickens THAT much cooler Im calling them my modern day dinosaurs

Saying that you are raising dionosaurs does sound cooler.

 

[DancesWithWolves]

a chicken comes from an egg so wouldn't the egg come first?........

 

[OccamsTazer]

Quote:
Biologist here, have to take issue with this.
"Just a theory" is a phrase based on an incorrect definition.
Theory, in the scientific sense, does not mean what most people intend it to mean in casual usage. A theory is a functional model used to explain natural phenomena, based on massive amounts of empirical evidence. The proper word for what you're describing is "hypothesis", which is completely different from theory.
Gravity, for example, is a theory. "Theory" is the most certainty you will get out of a legitimate scientist, but it does *not* mean "just some idea".
As far as the missing links thing, evolution is an ever-changing, continuous process. You don't find "missing links" because there aren't any. Evolution occurs on an incredibly long timeline, and the changes that occur between one generation and the next are tiny. It is the accumulated and gradual changes over time that leads to speciation.

/Not being mean, just adding some facts

So, a theory is the whys behind a law? Is that right?

Not quite, but close

A scientist isn't going to use the word "law", because it implies a level of certainty that can never be truly attained. "Theory" describes a model or a principle that is as absolute as you can get in science. The principles that make up a theory are based on countless observed fact. So, in this case, evolution is both a fact and a theory. A fact in that it has occurred, you can point and go "there it is", and a theory in the sense of a larger concept used to describe the way species change over time. A theory essentially is a law, except that it is always open to revision in the presence of new data. For example, gravity is a theory. Nothing has *ever* fallen up. However, if one day it did, we'd have to sit down and revise some things

Thanks for indulging my didactic peeve about the nonsense phrase, "just a theory"

I also have a beef with "venomous" vs "poisonous", but I'm just waiting for that snakebite thread.

 

[FortWorthChicks]

When my son was five he explained it all to me.

He said that when the dinosaurs were here they layed eggs... and then there was a big change and all the dinosaurs died and the eggs were changed too, chickens hatched out of dinosaur eggs!

There you go

 

[eggsrcool]

Eggs.

Otherwise how would an animal evolve without having to reproduce first?

 

[pat3494]

The egg definitely came first. What laid it was not exactly a chicken and the mutation occurred in the egg that developed into a chicken after it hatched; plain evolutionary theory.

 

[ebwy]

Quote:
I don't recall appointing you my proxy in the creation/evolution debate...??? Also, I can't accept that eggs came first so please don't include me in your "both sides" statement. Thank you.

I vote: CHICKEN

Best wishes,
Ed

I don't recall ever trying to be your proxy in anything, least of all this. So please don't take umbridge at the fact I joined in a light-hearted thread in a light-hearted manner, and accuse me of doing so. I neither know you, nor your views. Since you seem to find me objectionable, please skip any posts I may make in future, that way I can't offend you.
thank you.

for everyone who didn't think I was specifically targetting them personally -


I'm afraid that we need to look at how chickens were bred by humans, not dumped here by God as chickens right from the start. I'm not getting into the evolution/vs creation debate because I know that one side will never convince the other, and vice-versa.

Or are you saying that God created the springer spaniel, as opposed to humans breeding the dogs (which may have been brought here by creation or evolution... again not getting into that one) to develop specific traits?

chickens were bred from wild fowl, by people. Where the wild fowl came from, that's open to debate. But since the wild fowl also laid eggs, eggs HAD to come before the chickens or they wouldn't have been able to breed the specific traits into them to produce chickens.

wow, you think this thread is a bit of fun and then you get attitude just for being nice to all and pointing out that in this case either side could be right as chickens were bred by humans out of birds which were already there...

 

[ebwy]

also, for those who think it's cool to describe their chickens as dinosaurs - current paeleontological theory suggests that dinosaurs developed into birds, thus if you aren't a creationist you are entitled to think of your chickens as modern day dinos.

(and the way my lot attack their treats dish every time we take it out to them, they remind me of velociraptors!)