The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
hmmm...........
Page:
Memorandum! wrote:
> well for a start that isn't even his username mate.
damn it
> well for a start that isn't even his username mate.
damn it
The archives date back years, as do topics with thousands of posts, like WORLDS LONGESTs that are still around
Therefore he could read something from a year ago
Therefore he could read something from a year ago
well for a start that isn't even his username mate.
User name: S2upid
Regitered for: 27 days
How do you know what happened a year ago?
Regitered for: 27 days
How do you know what happened a year ago?
this topic has been done over a year ago.
Meka Dragon wrote:
> Depends what your stance of evolution is.
>
> And also, is the real question what came first, the chicken or the
> chicken egg, because some dinosaurs laid eggs before the days of
> chickens.
>
> The evolution view would be that at some point something that wasn't
> a chicken (but was almost there) laid an egg, and from it emerged
> what we not consider to be the chicken. At this point you still have
> the question of whether the egg that the chicken hatched from counts
> as a chicken egg, in which case it is the chicken that came first, or
> is it considered to be a non-chicken egg, having been laid by a
> creature that was yet to be a chicken?
>
> I guess the real question is whether an egg is of the type of what
> hatches inside it, or what laid it.
I always thought I made up that answer myself.
:(
> Depends what your stance of evolution is.
>
> And also, is the real question what came first, the chicken or the
> chicken egg, because some dinosaurs laid eggs before the days of
> chickens.
>
> The evolution view would be that at some point something that wasn't
> a chicken (but was almost there) laid an egg, and from it emerged
> what we not consider to be the chicken. At this point you still have
> the question of whether the egg that the chicken hatched from counts
> as a chicken egg, in which case it is the chicken that came first, or
> is it considered to be a non-chicken egg, having been laid by a
> creature that was yet to be a chicken?
>
> I guess the real question is whether an egg is of the type of what
> hatches inside it, or what laid it.
I always thought I made up that answer myself.
:(
Yeah, thats what "scientists" say. But to me the existence of a higher being (known to his friends as God) is less far fetched than the spontaneous creation of two complex molecules to form life and then that life going on to survive to spawn the entire life of the planet.
Geffdof wrote:
They are
> both so complex that they wouldnt just spontaneously come into
> existence
Why not? Surely the same thing could be said about everything in existence, what with "The Big Bang" being the most popular theory of why anything exists.
They are
> both so complex that they wouldnt just spontaneously come into
> existence
Why not? Surely the same thing could be said about everything in existence, what with "The Big Bang" being the most popular theory of why anything exists.
We've gone over the Chicken/egg thing a few times now.
A better question is what came first, DNA or protein? DNA is used to make proteins but proteins are used in the synthesis of DNA. They are both so complex that they wouldnt just spontaneously come into existence, unless God made them of course, but non of you believe that now, do you?
A better question is what came first, DNA or protein? DNA is used to make proteins but proteins are used in the synthesis of DNA. They are both so complex that they wouldnt just spontaneously come into existence, unless God made them of course, but non of you believe that now, do you?
Meka Dragon wrote:
> Stuff that is far too deep for my brain to process on a monday lunchtime.
Umm, yeah, I'd go with that!
> Stuff that is far too deep for my brain to process on a monday lunchtime.
Umm, yeah, I'd go with that!
Page: