The Instigator
ishi911
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Ragnar
Con (against)
Winning
17 Points

The chicken came first on the earth, not the egg

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Ragnar
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/16/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 684 times Debate No: 91296
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (4)
Votes (3)

 

ishi911

Pro

British researchers say the chicken must have come first as the formation of eggs is only possible thanks to a protein found in the chicken"s ovaries.
"It had long been suspected that the egg came first but now we have the scientific proof that shows that in fact the chicken came first," said Dr Colin Freeman, from Sheffield University, who worked with counterparts at Warwick University.
"The protein had been identified before and it was linked to egg formation but by examining it closely we have been able to see how it controls the process," he added.
The protein " called ovocledidin-17 (OC-17) " acts as a catalyst to speed up the development of the shell.
Scientists used a super computer called HECToR, based in Edinburgh, to "zoom in" on the formation of an egg.
It showed OC-17 was crucial in kick-starting crystallisation " the early stages of forming a shell.
The protein coverts calcium carbonate into calcite crystals which makes up the egg shell, creating six grammes of shell every 24 hours.
Prof John Harding, also of Sheffield University, said the discovery could have other uses.
"Understanding how chickens make shells is fascinating in itself but can also give clues towards designing new materials," he said.

Now my very respected opponent can say that how can the chicken come first without hatching from the egg? I believe in Creationism, I believe that God first created live chickens, just as He first created fully-grown humans. The reproduction of species is a part of intelligent design, so it followed after the initial creation of the being. It would make no sense for an egg to be created and then left to incubate itself, without the mother to warm it, protect it, etc.

And with that, i rest my debate.
VOTE PRO!
Ragnar

Con

Plagiarism detected! Pro stole his argument from an online newspaper [1], disqualifying it from consideration. Were someone to consider it, they would have to take pro at his claim of having written it and done the research, which as he's 15 now, and it was published in 2010, indicates it was all carried out by a 9-year-old who is openly opposed to the scientific method.

He also made some assertions about his personal beliefs, without rhyme nor reason in the way of evidence or why his opinion has any value. He has no case, and the duty full duty of BoP to make one. You can simply vote con at this point on either of the two reasons above...

In case that is not enough, I shall counter both the disqualified evidence, and the baseless assertions.

Argument
Premise: Evolution lead to a different species laying a chicken egg.
Contention 1:
As discussed by Scientific America, evolution is proven by fossil records, our shared bones with every other mammal, etc. [2].

Contention 2: Various ancestor species to chickens laid eggs.
Contention 3: Chickens currently exist
Conclusion: It was some non-chicken ancestor to the chicken that laid the first hard shelled egg from which a chicken like bird came from, and that (many repetitions down the line) the first chicken egg was laid baring a chicken [3, YouTube video]. Ergo the egg came first.

Rebuttals
(from plagiarized content) "British researchers say the chicken must have come first as the formation of eggs is only possible thanks to a protein found in the chicken's ovaries."
Simple insanity. In addition to every other species of bird; Lizards are born from eggs, and well known to not require contact with chickens (or at least special deliveries of their kidneys every mating season); as do fish; as do humans in our early development. Other research may make a similar claim and word it to not be inclusive to all eggs, but such was not presented.

"Now my very respected opponent can say that how can the chicken come first without hatching from the egg?"
Not my duty to prove your case for you when you are utterly unable.

"It would make no sense for an egg to be created and then left to incubate itself, without the mother to warm it, protect it, etc."
Easy, a different species laid the first chicken egg, warmed and protected it. Even the most devote creationist should agree, as chicken's do not exist in the bible, and must therefore have been a later introduction to the world.

Sources
[1] http://metro.co.uk...
[2] http://www.scientificamerican.com...
[3] YouTube video.

Debate Round No. 1
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Ragnar 1 year ago
Ragnar
@tejretics
I suspect whiteflame worded it to more help the voter in question understand what they did wrong (penalized for suggesting a plagiarism penalty), rather than what they could have done better. Sometimes baby steps are the best way to help someone improve.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
Tej, I get that, but it has nothing to do with how I evaluate the vote. Whether the effort to disqualify an argument was appropriate or not didn't factor into the decision because it didn't have to, though that probably would have been reason enough to have problems with it.
Posted by tejretics 1 year ago
tejretics
@Whiteflame

That is not a "disengagement with tactics" - pasting from a newspaper article without citation is *plagiarism.* I mean, obviously the Arguments, Sources and S&G points aren't explained, but that's more than sufficient to merit conduct.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: zman8881// Mod action: Removed<

5 points to Con (Arguments, Sources), 2 points to Pro (Conduct, S&G). Reasons for voting decision: Con loses the conduct points simply for pointing out that Pro's argument should be disqualified from consideration because it was pasted from a newspaper article. If you want to win, make the better argument, don't try to disqualify your opponents. Despite this poor conduct, Con did make the better arguments and used better (and more) sources.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) Conduct is insufficiently explained. While it's understandable that the voter doesn't like one of the tactics Con used in the debate, that disagreement is not reason enough to award conduct. It has to be clear that one side engaged in personal attacks against either the opponent or others, or that a forfeit occurred, in order to award this point (2) Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter merely restates the decision, failing to analyze points made by either side. (3) Sources are insufficiently explained. The voter merely restates the decision, failing to analyze sources cited by either side. (4) S&G is never explained.
************************************************************************
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Ockham 1 year ago
Ockham
ishi911RagnarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro plagiarized, so conduct, arguments, and sources have to go to Con. Pro also made some spelling and grammar mistakes, so I'm awarding that to Con as well. Don't plagiarize!
Vote Placed by famousdebater 1 year ago
famousdebater
ishi911RagnarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Plagiarism costs Pro the conduct point. Since plagiarized content does NOT count as an argument for Pro he ultimately has no arguments in his favor. Con provides arguments (which advances his burden). Pro's don't count so his burden cannot be advanced. Ergo, I vote Con on conduct and on arguments.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
ishi911RagnarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Plagiarism.