The Chicken Came Before The Egg!

explains my toes, then.

 

Why is that bullshit? Many esteemed scientists believe that we did come from the ocean.

 

i think he was either high or implying i don't believe in evolution since i said you can't call whatever may have evolved into a chicken a chicken.

 

look it up on wiki...

 

We should just eat both and settle it that way. Bet you they come out the same.

 

'Cultural references to the chicken and egg intend to point out the futility of identifying the first case of a circular cause and consequence'

 

'Professor Mark Rodger and Dr David Quigley, from the University of Warwick, who helped develop a recent study with colleagues from Sheffield University, point out that in fact a key chicken protein, ovocleidin-17, which helps in the formation of the egg's hard shell, actually comes both before and after the egg shell. They say that this chemical quirk actually makes the question of which came first even more pointless than before. As Professor Mark Rodger says "Does this really prove the chicken came before the egg? Well this actually further underlines that it's a fun but pointless question'

I figured as much.

 

What came first is neither chicken nor egg.

 

...yes.

I would say the scientists were not trying to answer the question.
But it gets them publicity...so they went with it.

 

Now you're getting philosophical on us. The context of the question is regarding chicken and egg. What came first is a whole other mind trip.


I'd have to say space (in some form) came first. Always has been and always will be.

 

i think , Chuck Norris

 

Surely his mother preceded him.

 

But, has it made you interested in eggs and chickens?
It has not done anything for me, tbh.

 

I imagine so.

 

You mean you're not having sleepless nights over it

 

Perhaps when I was 14. Not now, no.

 

Just great! There is no consensus on the two sides of this issue and you introduce a third.

Way to go!! :hurray:

 

You're not 14

 

Not one bit. But it has caused stimulating, thoughtful conversation, which I'm always grateful for.

 

Actually the question is a linguistic formula. I tried to point out that the formula was missing a key feature. It simply could not be answered as stated. Not much there to do with philosophy.

In regards the question of what came first, the word came makes it a motive question. Bodies at rest tend to stay that way. Bodies in motion tend to stay that way. To alter the trajectory of these things takes friction or tension. Intention.