Chicken vs Egg - Page 3

Originally posted by: Emptiness

i've heard creationism is taught in quite a few schools in the US, how bad is it in your neck of the woods?

Toto, we are not in Kansas here. Thankfully no! My neck of the woods is not full of the loonies. I'm lucky to be in one of America's most progressive counties. You don't get to be the first research lab to isolate the embryonic stem cell and a hub of global research, if you are steeped in creationism.

The bible thumping nut jobs are usually located in the south – the Carolinas, the Virginias, Kansas, Alabama, Texas, Mississippi etc.

chickens dont lay eggs, hens do.

Originally posted by: angie.4u

chickens dont lay eggs, hens do.

Originally posted by: dolphinUSA

Well if the chicken came first...how did it lay eggs without the help of another chicken? Were there 2 of them?

They do that all the time.

Originally posted by: dolphinUSA

If the egg came fist, and a chicken came out of it...how did it reproduce by itself to lay more eggs? Were there 2 of them?

Parthenogenesis as reproduction.

Originally posted by: dolphinUSA

I still hold my initial statement true - in the beginning there was a chicken and an egg :P

First there was nothing
Then God said let there be light
There still was nothing, but you could see nothing a whole lot better

It's a paradox, since no one can prove it!

The scientists found that a protein found only in a chicken's ovaries is necessary for the formation of the egg. The egg can therefore only exist if it has been created inside a chicken.

If you're a creationist the chicken came first...
If you're an evolutionist the egg came first...

It opens a gate to yet another pradox... which came first, science or religion! 😉

Originally posted by: souro

You are looking at it from Darwinism point of view. What if creationism is true? If God decided to put egg and chicken on earth, which one did God put first?

Creationism begins at the time humans were created, it does not account for what existed before humans were created. In my opinion, creationism supports the idea that unicellular organisms could have existed before the inception of humans and other multicellular organisms. Creationism and evolution do not have to be two contrasting theories. It could be that the egg came before the chicken, and the holy books like the Quran, the Bible, and the Torah represent the post-"chicken" era and not the "pre-chicken" era.

Originally posted by: .Doe.

What's written is written. I don't feel the need to question it.

"The key to wisdom is this -- constant and frequent questioning ... for by doubting we are led to question and by questioning we arrive at the truth."
- Peter Abelard

Originally posted by: Emptiness

i've heard creationism is taught in quite a few schools in the US, how bad is it in your neck of the woods?

That's not true. Evolution is taught in public schools, and creationism is taught in some private schools. I don't think there is any public school out there that openly teaches creationism to students. Technically, it's illegal to teach any kind of religious doctrine in public schools. Plus, most Americans would throw a hissy fit if there kids were being taught things about God in schools. Having said that, I am sure there are schools out there who also do not teach the evolutionary theory because they cannot teach creationism in school.

Originally posted by: *Woh Ajnabee*

Creationism begins at the time humans were created, it does not account for what existed before humans were created. In my opinion, creationism supports the idea that unicellular organisms could have existed before the inception of humans and other multicellular organisms. Creationism and evolution do not have to be two contrasting theories. It could be that the egg came before the chicken, and the holy books like the Quran, the Bible, and the Torah represent the post-"chicken" era and not the "pre-chicken" era.

I've never heard this version of creationism before.. creationists typically believe that all species were created as they are, but your version mixes evolution of animals and creation of humans, then the question is - if human were created, why not do the same with the animals?, why bother using evolution at all?