The chicken or the egg?

[bignateyk]

Clearly the egg. How could the chicken have come first?

 

[arrfep]

Originally posted by: bignateyk
Clearly the egg. How could the chicken have come first?

Well, I'm thinking that if the chicken never came, the egg would never have been fertilized.


:rimshot;

 

[Juddog]

Originally posted by: arrfep

Originally posted by: bignateyk
Clearly the egg. How could the chicken have come first?

Well, I'm thinking that if the chicken never came, the egg would never have been fertilized.


:rimshot;

Doh!

 

[smittybg]

Read the bible - Greatest historical book ever.

Genesis 1: 20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

So since the birds and animals came first the chicken was before the egg.

 

[jonks]

According to National Geographic, scientists say that reptiles were laying eggs thousands of years before chickens appeared, and the first chicken came from an egg laid by a bird that was not quite a chicken. That seems to answer the question. The egg came first.

 

[Oyeve]

Originally posted by: jonks
According to National Geographic, scientists say that reptiles were laying eggs thousands of years before chickens appeared, and the first chicken came from an egg laid by a bird that was not quite a chicken. That seems to answer the question. The egg came first.

So what came first? The Reptile or the egg?

 

[darkxshade]

Originally posted by: Juddog
Which came first?

The one with the pr0n.

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: Oyeve

Originally posted by: jonks
According to National Geographic, scientists say that reptiles were laying eggs thousands of years before chickens appeared, and the first chicken came from an egg laid by a bird that was not quite a chicken. That seems to answer the question. The egg came first.

So what came first? The Reptile or the egg?

The egg.

 

[Crusty]

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty
You can't have repeating 0's with a 1 on the end... that's not repeating zeros.

It's repeating zeroes until *dun dun dunnnnn* the end, where you place the 1.

I suggest you read up on your Math. You can not define a number that has a repeating decimal as having a finite end.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RepeatingDecimal.html

As soon as you say it ends in a 1, you can not saying repeating 0's.

 

[IGBT]

..dinosaurs came first. and they came from eggs.

 

[manowar821]

I never understood the point of this argument, because anyone with a studied outlook on the origins of species and life knows better. Is this question just theological bullshit, or does it exist only to start arguments and exercise debating skills?

In either case, the question itself is asinine.

 

[evident]

Originally posted by: manowar821
I never understood the point of this argument, because anyone with a studied outlook on the origins of species and life knows better. Is this question just theological bullshit, or does it exist only to start arguments and exercise debating skills?

In either case, the question itself is asinine.

people just want a definitive answer. thre is nothing theological about this question

 

[Juddog]

Originally posted by: evident

Originally posted by: manowar821
I never understood the point of this argument, because anyone with a studied outlook on the origins of species and life knows better. Is this question just theological bullshit, or does it exist only to start arguments and exercise debating skills?

In either case, the question itself is asinine.

people just want a definitive answer. thre is nothing theological about this question

Hmm I never thought to involve theology in discussion of eggs and chickens.

 

[Juddog]

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty
You can't have repeating 0's with a 1 on the end... that's not repeating zeros.

It's repeating zeroes until *dun dun dunnnnn* the end, where you place the 1.

I suggest you read up on your Math. You can not define a number that has a repeating decimal as having a finite end.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RepeatingDecimal.html

As soon as you say it ends in a 1, you can not saying repeating 0's.

Here is where the point is: ---> __o__
here is where you just went past: --> ________________________ :evil:

 

[Juddog]

"what came first, the chicken or the egg?
I egged the chicken then I ate his leg " Beastie boys, "Egg Man"

 

[Crusty]

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty
You can't have repeating 0's with a 1 on the end... that's not repeating zeros.

It's repeating zeroes until *dun dun dunnnnn* the end, where you place the 1.

I suggest you read up on your Math. You can not define a number that has a repeating decimal as having a finite end.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RepeatingDecimal.html

As soon as you say it ends in a 1, you can not saying repeating 0's.

Here is where the point is: ---> __o__
here is where you just went past: --> ________________________ :evil:

No, I understand what you are saying, it's just stupid and pointless and not even valid math.

The chicken and the egg is a valid question... but .0000...0001 is stupid.

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty
You can't have repeating 0's with a 1 on the end... that's not repeating zeros.

It's repeating zeroes until *dun dun dunnnnn* the end, where you place the 1.

I suggest you read up on your Math. You can not define a number that has a repeating decimal as having a finite end.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RepeatingDecimal.html

As soon as you say it ends in a 1, you can not saying repeating 0's.

Here is where the point is: ---> __o__
here is where you just went past: --> ________________________ :evil:

No, I understand what you are saying, it's just stupid and pointless and not even valid math.

The chicken and the egg is a valid question... but .0000...0001 is stupid.

You've been here since 2001; did you miss the thread he's referencing?

 

[Crusty]

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty
You can't have repeating 0's with a 1 on the end... that's not repeating zeros.

It's repeating zeroes until *dun dun dunnnnn* the end, where you place the 1.

I suggest you read up on your Math. You can not define a number that has a repeating decimal as having a finite end.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RepeatingDecimal.html

As soon as you say it ends in a 1, you can not saying repeating 0's.

Here is where the point is: ---> __o__
here is where you just went past: --> ________________________ :evil:

No, I understand what you are saying, it's just stupid and pointless and not even valid math.

The chicken and the egg is a valid question... but .0000...0001 is stupid.

You've been here since 2001; did you miss the thread he's referencing?

.9999... is a valid number.
.000...0001 isn't.

It's simple.

 

[Juddog]

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty
You can't have repeating 0's with a 1 on the end... that's not repeating zeros.

It's repeating zeroes until *dun dun dunnnnn* the end, where you place the 1.

I suggest you read up on your Math. You can not define a number that has a repeating decimal as having a finite end.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RepeatingDecimal.html

As soon as you say it ends in a 1, you can not saying repeating 0's.

Here is where the point is: ---> __o__
here is where you just went past: --> ________________________ :evil:

No, I understand what you are saying, it's just stupid and pointless and not even valid math.

The chicken and the egg is a valid question... but .0000...0001 is stupid.

You've been here since 2001; did you miss the thread he's referencing?

.9999... is a valid number.
.000...0001 isn't.

It's simple.

*woosh* you just missed the point yet again. Keep working at math though and maybe you'll prove P=NP.

 

[Crusty]

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty
You can't have repeating 0's with a 1 on the end... that's not repeating zeros.

It's repeating zeroes until *dun dun dunnnnn* the end, where you place the 1.

I suggest you read up on your Math. You can not define a number that has a repeating decimal as having a finite end.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RepeatingDecimal.html

As soon as you say it ends in a 1, you can not saying repeating 0's.

Here is where the point is: ---> __o__
here is where you just went past: --> ________________________ :evil:

No, I understand what you are saying, it's just stupid and pointless and not even valid math.

The chicken and the egg is a valid question... but .0000...0001 is stupid.

You've been here since 2001; did you miss the thread he's referencing?

.9999... is a valid number.
.000...0001 isn't.

It's simple.

*woosh* you just missed the point yet again. Keep working at math though and maybe you'll prove P=NP.

Then why don't you explain it?

 

[Juddog]

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty
You can't have repeating 0's with a 1 on the end... that's not repeating zeros.

It's repeating zeroes until *dun dun dunnnnn* the end, where you place the 1.

I suggest you read up on your Math. You can not define a number that has a repeating decimal as having a finite end.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RepeatingDecimal.html

As soon as you say it ends in a 1, you can not saying repeating 0's.

Here is where the point is: ---> __o__
here is where you just went past: --> ________________________ :evil:

No, I understand what you are saying, it's just stupid and pointless and not even valid math.

The chicken and the egg is a valid question... but .0000...0001 is stupid.

You've been here since 2001; did you miss the thread he's referencing?

.9999... is a valid number.
.000...0001 isn't.

It's simple.

*woosh* you just missed the point yet again. Keep working at math though and maybe you'll prove P=NP.

Then why don't you explain it?

It's quite simple. I accidentally the whole zero repeating.

 

[Crusty]

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty
You can't have repeating 0's with a 1 on the end... that's not repeating zeros.

It's repeating zeroes until *dun dun dunnnnn* the end, where you place the 1.

I suggest you read up on your Math. You can not define a number that has a repeating decimal as having a finite end.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RepeatingDecimal.html

As soon as you say it ends in a 1, you can not saying repeating 0's.

Here is where the point is: ---> __o__
here is where you just went past: --> ________________________ :evil:

No, I understand what you are saying, it's just stupid and pointless and not even valid math.

The chicken and the egg is a valid question... but .0000...0001 is stupid.

You've been here since 2001; did you miss the thread he's referencing?

.9999... is a valid number.
.000...0001 isn't.

It's simple.

*woosh* you just missed the point yet again. Keep working at math though and maybe you'll prove P=NP.

Then why don't you explain it?

It's quite simple. I accidentally the whole zero repeating.

Great explanation...

I'm just going to go with you're a dumbass on this one.

.000...0001 is not valid, never has and never will be. You can't say something has an infinite number of something followed by something else, that's changing the definition of infinity.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: theflyingpig
The egg. Chickens came from dinosaurs and dinosaurs laid eggs. I should know. I was there.

Then you ruined everything by drinking to much...

AMIDOINITRITE?

 

[Juddog]

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: Crusty
You can't have repeating 0's with a 1 on the end... that's not repeating zeros.

It's repeating zeroes until *dun dun dunnnnn* the end, where you place the 1.

I suggest you read up on your Math. You can not define a number that has a repeating decimal as having a finite end.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RepeatingDecimal.html

As soon as you say it ends in a 1, you can not saying repeating 0's.

Here is where the point is: ---> __o__
here is where you just went past: --> ________________________ :evil:

No, I understand what you are saying, it's just stupid and pointless and not even valid math.

The chicken and the egg is a valid question... but .0000...0001 is stupid.

You've been here since 2001; did you miss the thread he's referencing?

.9999... is a valid number.
.000...0001 isn't.

It's simple.

*woosh* you just missed the point yet again. Keep working at math though and maybe you'll prove P=NP.

Then why don't you explain it?

It's quite simple. I accidentally the whole zero repeating.

Great explanation...

I'm just going to go with you're a dumbass on this one.

.000...0001 is not valid, never has and never will be. You can't say something has an infinite number of something followed by something else, that's changing the definition of infinity.

Oh yeah!? Well just for that, I am going to divide by zero *boom*. :disgust:

 

[SlitheryDee]

"A chicken is just an egg's way of making another egg".