Which came first? The chicken or the egg?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by ZZZzzzzzzz, May 26, 2006.

So which came first?

  1. The Chicken

    20 vote(s)
    74.1%
  2. The Chicken Egg

    7 vote(s)
    25.9%
  1. We agree, chicken came first.

    You have not proven that it all comes down to evolution though....

    Theories of evolution of chicken from nothing don't prove it....a working theory is not a proof.

    Oh, and yes, there are intermediatary steps in the theory, which are also theory, but all of those exist also within a bigger theory....which is full of holes, the mind is capable of much rationalization in order to hold a theory.

    Theories on theories on theories on theories on theories...ad infinitum...

     
    #111     Jun 1, 2006
  2. evolution is not a theory is a reality, that we don't know all the steps it is a different matter but almost everythin' can be traced back to fossile evidence...matter of time my friend, matter of time...
     
    #112     Jun 1, 2006
  3. It is your reality perhaps, but it is, in fact, just a theory....

     
    #113     Jun 1, 2006
  4. yes it is a reality for rational humang beings, but a theory for religious fanatics, no q. about that.
     
    #114     Jun 1, 2006
  5. Did rational human beings once believe the sun revolved around the earth?

    If so, and unless we know all data points, then it is not rational knowlege of evolution it is a theory of evolution that some people accept and believe as fact...but evolution of species from lower species to higher species in all species is not a fact.

    Incomplete data produces incomplete theories that are latched onto by the intellectual mind the way a theist latches onto scripture....

    The intellectual worships incompleteness, and the theist prays to, and for completeness.....

     
    #115     Jun 1, 2006
  6. Ricter

    Ricter

    You've done this in your other threads too: "just a theory". Again, as I stated there, you do not understand the difference between scientific theory, and the everyday usage.

    "Theories on theories on theories" are a lot more predictive, that is, useful, than your blather on blather on blather.
     
    #116     Jun 1, 2006
  7. Please stop the personal attacks and flaming.

    Disappearing posts by Ricter are not an act of evolution....they are not random, they are not mutations, they are by design.

     
    #117     Jun 1, 2006
  8. Ricter

    Ricter

    That's not personal, I was talking about what you say.

    Anyway, threatening "disappearing posts by Ricter" is your act of desperation. Thanks for demonstrating, again, what I said about you never losing.
     
    #118     Jun 1, 2006
  9. yes those rational human being were part of the church and thx gawd some1 like galileo and newton explained how things really worked...before them copernico didnt have much to go around, it was just speculation. but in the case of evolution there is tangible proof that we [and our planet] went trough a process of transformation called infact 'evolution'.
     
    #119     Jun 1, 2006
  10. Ricter

    Ricter

    The chicken is specific, the egg less so. If you go back far enough, you don't find evidence of chickens anymore, but you do still find eggs.
     
    #120     Jun 1, 2006