It has been answered: The chicken came first!

[Lord Mountbatten Reborn]

I used religion as an exlanation of how the chicken came first...how is that not relevant to the topic? It was everyone else who started the religion debate by screaming evolution at me.

Calling Evolution "crap" is likely what got you the probation. If someone had gone out of their way to insult creationism, the same would've happened to them. It's needless trolling. You can use religion to explain how the chicken came first, but you can't needlessly attack an opposing argument.

 

[DementedSheep]

Or whatever came before what was 'technically classed as a chicken' also had that protein.
Evolution isn't sudden. A lizard doesn?t lay and egg and all of a sudden a chicken hatches out of it. Evolution is generally very gradual changes and it can take many thousands of years before the affect becomes noticeable.

 

[Bluesclues]

Snip the Second

You're a troll in the sense that you attempted to bring religion and religious beliefs into this thread. While there's nothing against the discussion of religion on this website, there are specific rules about discussing religion outside of the designated threads. The mods frown upon it, and do distribute punishment for it. It can also be considered de-railing the thread, since your belief has nothing to do with the actual main topic of this thread.

I used religion as an exlanation of how the chicken came first...how is that not relevant to the topic? It was everyone else who started the religion debate by screaming evolution at me.

Easily. Here is the original question the OP asks as the discussion:

So, does this goes for or against your previous thoughts about the question?

This is what you wrote:

That was easy. Its pretty obvious that God created the chicken first to lay more eggs. All this evolution crap is just dumb. If there was a "near chicken" or "almost chicken" where is the proof? there would be a fossil or something. You evolutionists arent big of proof are you? seeing as your...religion if you will...hasnt been proven. In fact its been disproven more that proven. Even evolutions founder, Charles Darwin, said it was wrong.

Your argument has nothing to do with the question up for discussion, and therefore, you are de-railing the thread in posting it. Furthermore, it has to do with religion, which I've already explained need to be posted in the proper forums to be discussed, or risk being reprimanded for it, as you already have been once before.

And like this gentlemen said:

Calling Evolution "crap" is likely what got you the probation. If someone had gone out of their way to insult creationism, the same would've happened to them. It's needless trolling. You can use religion to explain how the chicken came first, but you can't needlessly attack an opposing argument.

Case closed.

 

[lovemyredguitar]

This question is actually up for interpretation. The theist would say Chicken,and the atheist would say egg. The answer is in what you believe.

In response to your article, i still say egg

 

[CAPTCHA]

Well I had eggs for breakfast and chicken for tea - therefore the egg came first.

 

[ArcWinter]

It all depends on how you phrase the guestion.

If you don't like that answer, then take comfort in the fact that time is actually cyclical and the chicken and the egg existed in a guantum parallel at the same moment.

Actually, the question is linguistic, not metaphysical. And the correct response would obviously be "tetraphobia".

man doing science is easy you just have to put words toqether and then say guantum i could do this for a livinq