chicken or egg came first- the egg
Debate Rounds (3)
the lithmus test for whether the chicken or egg came first, should be a defined list of DNA being met.
science is inexact in listing what constitutes a species. if the animal meets criteria like two wings a beak two chicken legs etc, then it is a chicken. the problem is that this is an inexact science. it is sufficient for everyday use, sure. but a line has to be drawn. how do we draw it? the only way is to make a criteria in DNA and stick to it.
we run into a problem similar to someone trying to sell something. a man wants to sell his 57 chevy for ten thousand. would be take a penny less? sure. two pennies? you see where i'm going with this. the man must set a limit. 9500 and not a penny less? so someone were to offer him a penny less and he doesn't take it, is it really a firm limit? in practice, the man might take it, but we all know a point must be drawn.
in practice, scientists might take less than a nucleotide or piece of DNA, but a point must be drawn.
what constitutes a chicken then will have a firm limit. in the line of chicken like animals before a chicken, there will be close calls no doubt. but it will be one animal that will evetually fill the criteria, meet the DNA match's minimum. and that animal will be first an egg, which hatches into the chicken that meets the match.
practically, the parents of the chicken might be called chickens in everyday use, but a line indeed must be drawn, so they technically are not chickens.
Why have you not posted your opening argument???
Are you deliberately attempting do not present your argument?
I withold my arguments until I have recieved an appropriate response.
due to con's inability to just get to it already, and ignoring the opening arguments not just once, which could plausibly be excusable, but twice, which is in no way excusable, i can see this isn't going to lead anywhere productive.
please read the first post by me for opening arguments.
given con hasn't addressed anything, there will be no chance for me to respond. but, it's self evidently true my arguments, con can only add semantics or just argue that my approach is not optimal. seems pretty optimal to me, though. a line has to be drawn somehow, somewhere. and it's the least arbitary most scientific way, the way i described. leaving there to be no other way but an egg that hatches into the first chicken.
I have misunderstand this debate.
There is no point in me providing an argument now.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||4||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Con failed.
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.