The chicken came before the egg.
Debate Rounds (2)
1)The chicken came before the egg because without the chicken, there would be no egg. The chicken somehow appeared together with the first humans, dinosaurs and giant insects. (Big Bang Theory, Theory of How the First Living Things Appeared)
2)The chicken still came before the egg, because God created the chicken to lay eggs. Of course He didn't create an egg and hatch it like a chicken. (Christianity Belief)
3)The chicken still, very still, so 'still' it's like a wooden chicken (Chinese proverb--呆!509;木(481;+A289;because some other bird (not chicken) laid an egg and the egg evolved and mutated into a chicken. (Evolutionary Theory)
+This means that sb is so surprised, he stays as still as a wooden chicken.
1.) This theory isn't very specific. You have failed to explain why and how the chicken just appeared out of nowhere. Neither dinosaurs, humans and giant insects appeared out of nowhere. They gradually evolved due to helpful genetic mutations that allowed them to adapt and survive more easily. This means that chickens cant have just come out of nowhere.
2.) Not everyone believes in God and since you have not presented any evidence to prove that God exists (not that there is any) we will have to assume that God does not exist. If we assume that God exists then you can say that anything happened. You could disprove anything and claim that God did it.
3.) This theory is in favor of my case. If the egg evolved and mutated into a chicken that means that the egg was there first. This is the theory that I would have used to present my case. My theory is simply that a similar bird to a chicken laid an egg and due to a genetic mutation or fault the egg ended up mutating the bird and made it a chicken. In the current area in which the birds were living these birds could not survive in the long term. However the chickens were able to survive because there differences suited the are and its climate. Eventually, the original birds died out and the chickens were left to live in this new area (survival of the fittest - Darwinian theory).
I look forward to reading Pros rebuttals.
Here is my reasons why the chicken came before the egg. This time I have 2 points.
1) If you are religious and believe in gods, the chicken MUST have came first because some sort of your God (be it Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Taoist, or something else) created it.
2)If you choose to believe in the Darwinian or Evolutionary Theory,as Opposition mentioned, the egg MUTATED into a chicken, and this means that the EGG, because of external factors, CHANGED and became a chicken. But do you think it changed completely? Of course not! The egg mutated into the ancestors of the chicken, but not defined as the chicken we see today. This means that the mutated "half-chicken" who came out from the mutated "half-chicken egg" started spawning with the other birds and their offspring continued to evolve until it became the chicken we see today. Now, I'm coming to my most powerful point. If the first egg was only a "half-chicken egg", and "half-chickens" started to evolve into the modern chicken, there is still no evidence to prove that in the evolutionary process, the "half-chickens" laid an egg which become the modern chicken. It could have been the egg, which was still "half-chicken" hatched out an "almost-there chicken", and in the growth and maturity process of that "almost-there chicken", it became 100%, genetically, and physically the modern chicken.
In conclusion, I think I deserve to take the first point as the majority of religious people believe that the chicken came before the egg. Even though some religions may have different thoughts, the few largest ones in the world believe in my first point. Now, moving on to the second point. I think I can get half of the second point as their is a 50% chance that the chicken came before the egg, and the Opposition deserves the other 50%. Adding up our scores, I should take 1.5 points and Opposition only gets 0.5, unless Opposition come up with something good the next round.
Whereas, I have rebutted all of pros theories and also presented mine. Pro has only given theories and has failed to refute my case. I have used evidence and since pro has said that I haven't I will use some more evidence to prove that I am right.
'"The egg takes precedence. Many characteristics of the modern avian egg"namely an oblong, asymmetrical shape and a hardened shell"were in place before birds diverged from dinosaurs about 150 million years ago. "A lot of the traits that we see in bird eggs evolved prior to birds in theropod dinosaurs," says Darla Zelenitsky, of the University of Calgary.'
I have not only provided scientific evidence. I have also shown how it makes sense in terms of the Darwinian theory. Pro has used God as evidence - this does not make sense because there is no real convincing evidence that God exists if Pro could prove this then he'd become famous and the atheist population would significantly decrease. I do not believe in God and many others don't either so unless you can provide some evidence the majority will believe (including me) I will not except the existence of God as a legitimate theory to use in this debate.
Pro has also attempted to use the Evolutionary theory to help present his case. In order for the chicken to be born it must have been in an egg. A major mutation could change the egg of a different bird into the egg of a chicken (thus creating the chicken). The egg of the chicken is first because as science has proven a chicken comes out of an egg (fairly simple). It is possible that Pro's theory that the chicken mutates over time is true but that doesn't change the fact that eventually a chicken came out of an egg. Pro's continuation of his theory suggesting that the "almost there chicken" 'became 100%, genetically, and physically the modern chicken' this is a possibility but this is not as likely as the theory posed by me. Furthermore, Pro hasn't provided any evidence to why this would happen and my theory wouldn't.
In response to Pro (bias) conclusion I would like to point out that Pro believes he should win because some religions believe his first point relating to God. His theories contradict each other because he has used the evolutionary theory and Gods creation story. Pro's claim that majority of religious people believe the chicken came before the egg cannot be taken into account because no source has been provided. This means that we have to assume that this claim is false. I don't understand Pros distribution of points.
Sources - Me (no sources by pro)
Convincing argument - Me (contradicting arguments)
Conduct - Tied
Spelling and Grammar - Tied (unless there are any spelling mistakes that I missed)
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.