▲ 11 ▼ Was there ever a solid or scientific answers to which came first chicken or the egg? (lemmy.world) submitted 1 month ago by Patnou@lemmy.world to c/nostupidquestions@lemmy.world 35 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 child) What’s your point? Unfertilized eggs don’t hatch, so they’re not part of the scenario in question. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] over_clox@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago* (3 children) What's your point? Literal, and wrong, quote from you.... The [unfertilized] egg is already the new offspring. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago A quote isn’t “literal” if you insert a word that completely negates its meaning. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Postmortal_Pop@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago A for enthusiasm, F for reading comprehension... permalink fedilink source parent [–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 child) when it’s fertilized. You seem to have missed that part. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] over_clox@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago* (1 child) Did you even read their comment? https://lemmy.world/comment/24532177 No, but the fallacy is in thinking the new species appears when the egg hatches, rather than when it’s fertilized. The egg is already the new offspring. This is completely incorrect. Only a fertilized egg can create offspring. But that is not what they said. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 child) It was clear as day to me that they were talking about the fertilization process, which implies that they meant a fertilized egg. It's not their fault you misread it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] OriginEnergySux@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago permalink fedilink source parent
[–] over_clox@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago* (3 children) What's your point? Literal, and wrong, quote from you.... The [unfertilized] egg is already the new offspring. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago A quote isn’t “literal” if you insert a word that completely negates its meaning. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Postmortal_Pop@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago A for enthusiasm, F for reading comprehension... permalink fedilink source parent [–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 child) when it’s fertilized. You seem to have missed that part. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] over_clox@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago* (1 child) Did you even read their comment? https://lemmy.world/comment/24532177 No, but the fallacy is in thinking the new species appears when the egg hatches, rather than when it’s fertilized. The egg is already the new offspring. This is completely incorrect. Only a fertilized egg can create offspring. But that is not what they said. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 child) It was clear as day to me that they were talking about the fertilization process, which implies that they meant a fertilized egg. It's not their fault you misread it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] OriginEnergySux@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago permalink fedilink source parent
[–] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago A quote isn’t “literal” if you insert a word that completely negates its meaning. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Postmortal_Pop@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago A for enthusiasm, F for reading comprehension... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 child) when it’s fertilized. You seem to have missed that part. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] over_clox@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago* (1 child) Did you even read their comment? https://lemmy.world/comment/24532177 No, but the fallacy is in thinking the new species appears when the egg hatches, rather than when it’s fertilized. The egg is already the new offspring. This is completely incorrect. Only a fertilized egg can create offspring. But that is not what they said. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 child) It was clear as day to me that they were talking about the fertilization process, which implies that they meant a fertilized egg. It's not their fault you misread it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] OriginEnergySux@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago permalink fedilink source parent
[–] over_clox@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago* (1 child) Did you even read their comment? https://lemmy.world/comment/24532177 No, but the fallacy is in thinking the new species appears when the egg hatches, rather than when it’s fertilized. The egg is already the new offspring. This is completely incorrect. Only a fertilized egg can create offspring. But that is not what they said. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 child) It was clear as day to me that they were talking about the fertilization process, which implies that they meant a fertilized egg. It's not their fault you misread it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] OriginEnergySux@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 child) It was clear as day to me that they were talking about the fertilization process, which implies that they meant a fertilized egg. It's not their fault you misread it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] OriginEnergySux@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago permalink fedilink source parent