The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
debatre
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

chicken or the egg- i say the egg came first

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/19/2015 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 574 times Debate No: 77862
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (0)

 

dairygirl4u2c

Pro

one needs to define chicken. a chicken is one which can mate and have kids with at least one chicken in existence. if you were to go back in time, there would be the first chicken capable of doing this. that chicken came in the form of an egg.
debatre

Con

Depends on how the earth started! If God made everything, the chicken most likely was created first. If evolution created chickens, then the chicken most likely came after the egg.
Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

science has spoken on how the earth and creatures came to be. small cellular organisms became big organisms.

reiterate my last posts.
debatre

Con

Well, if life came from cells, those cells made animals, and then the animals evolved gradually into chicken's ancestors, from which they laid eggs, therefore the egg came after the chicken in both Creation and Evolutionary theories. And on a side note, Science has "spoken" multiple times and almost if not every time they've been wrong about their own theory... #Creation
Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

you dont define chicken. i make a great definition of chicken that depends on their relation to modern day chicken. if you actually define chicken, it would be the egg that comes first.
debatre

Con

I accepted your definition of chicken, this is true. Is it not reasonable to say there must first be an animal in the same family as chicken, a chicken's ancestor, that must have been before the egg to lay the egg, so that the chicken family could exist? Lets break it down a bit. If, by your theory, life spotaneously just began, it did not come from an egg, since this first being would ultimately be the first chicken ancestor. This ancestor would have predated the egg by millions of years! It would also fit your definition entirely, because it had the ability to mate with other chicken ancestors, which was your only requirement of the chicken definition.

Also, if we come at this from a Creationist view point, we can see in the book of Genisis that God made the first chickens on the fith day of creation. He does not say that he created an egg, therefore, we can assume the chicken came first. Either way in either belief, the chicken had to have came first to create the egg. How can you have chicken offspring without a chicken being first?

Cheers everyone :)
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Edril 1 year ago
Edril
Instigator defined chicken, but not egg....

A proto-chicken laid a mutated version of a proto-chicken egg, which a modern chicken hatched from.... modern chicken = mutated proto-chicken.

So AN egg came first. But whether we call it a chicken egg or a proto-chicken egg is still debatable.
Posted by debatre 1 year ago
debatre
The pro side added "modern" chicken in his final round, he changed his own definition at the last second even after I accepted his definition. I obviously didn't agree with his change of definition, and went with the first one he, himself, provided.
Posted by debatre 1 year ago
debatre
The pro side mearly said chicken. A "chicken" is merely a group of species, he at no time said the first modern chicken. Because we are talking about which came first, we MUST look at how chickens were created at the BEGINNING of time, specifying on how the beginning came to be, all the more important to be established. Also, to say that the THEORY of Evolution, would be easier to prove is assinine. Therefore both theory should be applicable to the subject, and are discussed in all of my rounds. Sorry TinyBudah, don't get butthurt over a previous round.
Posted by TinyBudha 1 year ago
TinyBudha
rfd
pro wins this debate. He defined chicken as the animal which is able to mate with the modern day chicken. By doing this he effectively wins by definition. If an animal similar to a chicken but not able to reproduce with a modern chicken layed an egg which would then become the first chicken which could reproduce with a modern chicken then the egg would have had to come first. The arguments on evolution vs creation weren't relevant in this debate and even if it were the con would have had a hard time proving creationism.
Posted by canis 1 year ago
canis
It is a stupid question.. There is no first. But co-relation...
Posted by debatre 1 year ago
debatre
Actually, after deeper thought, a chicken ancestor would have had to been before the egg.
Posted by mobshark 1 year ago
mobshark
If the egg came first, where did it originate without a chicken host.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
an egg, is a chicken being born, and a chicken, is an egg being born O.o
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
chicken=egg+hatch
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
there is no egg before an egg layer, egg and chicken are one and the same
No votes have been placed for this debate.