Chicken or the Egg?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-04-2014, 04:41 PM
RE: Chicken or the Egg?
When Chuck Norris wants an egg, he cracks a chicken.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
17-04-2014, 07:49 PM
RE: Chicken or the Egg?
(17-04-2014 04:41 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  When Chuck Norris wants an egg, he cracks a chicken.

Boooooo

Atir aissom atir imon
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-04-2014, 08:50 PM
RE: Chicken or the Egg?
But why did the chicken cross the road?

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-04-2014, 09:04 PM
RE: Chicken or the Egg?
(17-04-2014 08:50 PM)Anjele Wrote:  But why did the chicken cross the road?

She heard there was cock on the other side.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Taqiyya Mockingbird's post
18-04-2014, 06:51 AM (This post was last modified: 18-04-2014 01:20 PM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Chicken or the Egg?
(17-04-2014 04:39 PM)jaguar3030 Wrote:  
(17-04-2014 09:26 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Incorrect. All you've done is try to establish a demarcation line between 'modern' chicken eggs and earlier chicken eggs; both are still chicken eggs, both still laid and hatched by chickens and they both still gave rise to even more chickens. I could just as easily argue that a 'modern' chicken was first required that could produce the protein necessary for the 'modern' chicken eggs; it gets you nowhere... Drinking Beverage

I think we are going around in circles. I do not see how I am incorrect. Eggs from other fowl do not contain this protein. Eggs from chickens do contain this protein.

I am not following your train of thought, though. If I substitute humans for chickens, we get:

All you've done is try to establish a demarcation line between 'modern' humans and earlier humans; both are still humans, both still born by humans and they both still gave rise to even more humans.

And as for your gradient example, we could look at the wavelengths of the colors and find exactly where that line of demarcations exists, yes?

Okay, now follow along with me.

Where did the modern protein-enriched egg come from? A chicken.

Where did those chickens come from before the modern protein-enriched eggs? Just an earlier version of chicken eggs, sans-protein; but still very much a chicken's egg.

When was this unique protein introduced? Was it at the exact generation where chickens emerged from their non-chicken parents? I highly doubt it.

Chickens evolve, and so do their eggs. Within the context of the species, the emergence of the protein-enriched eggs is meaningless for determining 'which came first'; as the traits of the egg are necessarily dependant on the creatures that make them, the chickens. The pre-enriched chicken eggs were still chicken eggs, because they were still laid by chickens...

Chicken eggs are dependant on chickens, and whatever species that chickens evolved from (wherever we may choose to draw that line in the evolutionary sand), where also egg laying avians. Eggs as a function of evolution predate the emergence of chickens, but the very question of whether or not chickens or chicken eggs came first is nonsensical and meaningless. Looking back into evolution you cannot draw a distinct line where one generation was a pre-chicken and then their children were chickens, and stop to look to see whether the new species of chickens emerged from chicken eggs (thus the chicken egg came first) or pre-chicken eggs (thus the chicken came first).

Every child is just a slight modification of whatever it's parents were, this was the point of the gradient image that seems to have slipped past you. Try to imagine the evolutionary timeline for the population of creatures that gave rise to modern chickens. If you had a time machine and could visit them at any time, all you would see is parents giving birth to more of their own species. The population as a whole evolved slowly along a gradient, the changes that delineate the emergence of populations that can no longer interbreed (the demarcation line of speciation) does not arise in a single generation.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like EvolutionKills's post
18-04-2014, 08:55 AM
RE: Chicken or the Egg?
(18-04-2014 06:51 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(17-04-2014 04:39 PM)jaguar3030 Wrote:  I think we are going around in circles. I do not see how I am incorrect. Eggs from other fowl do not contain this protein. Eggs from chickens do contain this protein.

I am not following your train of thought, though. If I substitute humans for chickens, we get:

All you've done is try to establish a demarcation line between 'modern' humans and earlier humans; both are still humans, both still born by humans and they both still gave rise to even more humans.

And as for your gradient example, we could look at the wavelengths of the colors and find exactly where that line of demarcations exists, yes?

Okay, now follow along with me.

Where did the modern protein-enriched egg come from? A chicken.

Where did those chickens come from before the modern protein-enriched eggs? Just an earlier version of chicken eggs, sans-protein; but still very much a chicken's egg.

When was this unique protein introduced? Was it at the exact generation where chickens emerged from their non-chicken parents? I highly doubt it.

Chickens evolve, and so do their eggs. Within the context of the species, the emergence of the protein-enriched eggs is meaningless for determining 'which came first'; as the traits of the egg are necessarily dependant on the creatures that make them, the chickens. The pre-enriched chicken eggs were still chicken eggs, because they were still laid by chickens...

Chicken eggs are dependant on chickens, and whatever species that chickens evolved from (wherever we may choose to draw that line in the evolutionary sand), where also egg laying avians. Eggs as a function of evolution predate the emergence of chickens, but the very question of whether or not chickens or chicken eggs came first is nonsensical and meaningless. Looking back into evolution you cannot draw a distinct line where one generation was a pre-chicken and then their children were chickens, and stop to look to see whether the new species of chickens emerged from chicken eggs (thus the egg chicken egg came first) or pre-chicken eggs (thus the chicken came first).

Every child is just a slight modification of whatever it's parents were, this was the point of the gradient image that seems to have slipped past you. Try to imagine the evolutionary timeline for the population of creatures that gave rise to modern chickens. If you had a time machine and could visit them at any time, all you would see is parents giving birth to more of their own species. The population as a whole evolved slowly along a gradient, the changes that delineate the emergence of populations that can no longer interbreed (the demarcation line of speciation) does not arise in a single generation.

Neither of us is wrong, we are just looking at the phrase from different perspectives. I'm looking at it from the perspective of when the protein arose. This isn't an individual approach--we aren't able to figure out which exact bird possessed the mutation that enabled that protein to be produced. We can put it on a timeline..kind of like a cladogram..of when certain traits/mutations emerged that led to our modern chicken.

[Image: fossil_egg_chart.jpg]



[Image: mammal-cladogram-the-tree-of-life-evolutio-15.gif]

Couldn't find one on birds, but this one kind of illustrates my point. Obviously we would be looking at it on a very specific scale if we are talking about protein mutations.

I agree with you on the nonsensical nature of the phrase, but it is still a useful phrase to begin discussions on biology.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like jaguar3030's post
18-04-2014, 10:14 AM
RE: Chicken or the Egg?
I deem this whole "chicken or egg" issue to be a theist conspiracy.
It is a plot devised long ago, to have unbelievers perpetually battle each other so flakiness amongst the rank & file atheist becomes palpable. In this way, they will become outwardly recognized as heretics and thus, never get laid and heresy will die out. Angel

Dodgy

***
Both EvolutionKills and Jaguar3030 have described well reasoned, very insightful, and accurate information in their discussion of evolutionary biology. In my estimation, it is a very fruitful discussion; I've learned quite a few things I kind of knew... but wasn't exactly certain of . It kind of tweaked a few things and helped me let go of some inaccuracies I think I developed along my learning experience. Thumbsup

I often wish more theist types could be privy to this kind of exchange. They would not only learn about evolution, they would also learn that there are many angles to be observed when trying to know something accurately. They might also learn that the more one knows, the wider the scope of learning becomes - the horizon of knowledge opens up.

I'm currently going through a series of lectures on how scientists know what they know. In the 17th century, there was an huge issue about "knowing" as opposed to "knowing enough". "Knowing enough" meant knowing something only so far as it pertained to one's commitment to faith. It came to be quite a schism and certainly explains the theist mindset; one is only obliged to go so far... and give everything else to god.

But I digress...

So, which came first.... the theist or the atheist? Wink

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like kim's post
18-04-2014, 10:53 AM
RE: Chicken or the Egg?
(18-04-2014 10:14 AM)kim Wrote:  But I digress...

So, which came first.... the theist or the atheist? Wink

Hahaha!

The new Cosmos series did a great job in kind of addressing this in the 3rd episode. The first 'theists' were really very primitive scientists. Our ancestors saw patterns, and with their limited view of the world, they made inferences based on what they knew. I don't blame our ancestors for having such a strong religious ideology back then.

However, many religious people today are still stuck in that primitive view of the world. That their actions somehow please/displease some god and that the gods will communicate to them through signs. Very primitive way of thinking and also very egocentric.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes jaguar3030's post
18-04-2014, 01:19 PM
RE: Chicken or the Egg?
(18-04-2014 10:14 AM)kim Wrote:  But I digress...

So, which came first.... the theist or the atheist? Wink


Atheists.


Because I'm pretty sure there existed creatures that lacked a belief in gods long before one of them spoke up and tried to anthropomorphise something they simply didn't understand and another one of their compatriots said "yeah, that sounds like mammoth shit".

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: