slicer4ever
Coding random shit
i submit that evolutionarily the chicken came first, but literally the egg came first.
evolutionarily, think about it, the earliest forms of biological lifeforms would split to procreate, however, at some point, after thousands upon thousands of minor mutations, some life forms required a mate to procreate, at one point, a boundary was most likely crossed where life most probably could either split to procreate, or another life form could "mate" with it, and procreate, eventually, the latter form produced more lifeforms that could survive, and procreate, removing the splitting method(through more and more mutations), and eventually a mutation occurred, which gave way to the chickens we know today, which layed an egg, just as it's slightly different versions before it had been doing, since the moment an lifeform developed a mutation that caused it to lay eggs outside of the body.
of course if we ask the question from a literal standpoint(life, or the seed of life?), i'd say the seed came first, or at least a series of particles which combined in such a way, and over millions upon millions of years, which eventually gave way to the life we know of today, starting out as some super simple combination of elements to from an extremely simple protein, or such, basically my argument is that life does not require life to be created, but just a correct combination of particles(for example, break any living organism down, and you find it's just a bunch of atoms)
thoughts?
evolutionarily, think about it, the earliest forms of biological lifeforms would split to procreate, however, at some point, after thousands upon thousands of minor mutations, some life forms required a mate to procreate, at one point, a boundary was most likely crossed where life most probably could either split to procreate, or another life form could "mate" with it, and procreate, eventually, the latter form produced more lifeforms that could survive, and procreate, removing the splitting method(through more and more mutations), and eventually a mutation occurred, which gave way to the chickens we know today, which layed an egg, just as it's slightly different versions before it had been doing, since the moment an lifeform developed a mutation that caused it to lay eggs outside of the body.
of course if we ask the question from a literal standpoint(life, or the seed of life?), i'd say the seed came first, or at least a series of particles which combined in such a way, and over millions upon millions of years, which eventually gave way to the life we know of today, starting out as some super simple combination of elements to from an extremely simple protein, or such, basically my argument is that life does not require life to be created, but just a correct combination of particles(for example, break any living organism down, and you find it's just a bunch of atoms)
thoughts?