Fang wrote:No, not against me. I don't remember remember the last time I lost an argument

keep arguing on the forum then, you will soon find out.

Okay, I will. I love argueing

you just have to pick the side opposing ours (Ahmed's or mine)

I can't argue against what I believe...

ok, so we will see in future debates

So we will...

I'm gonna try to think of something

Well you'll lose this argument Fang.

Ok, you wanted to change this topic to "Is evolution true?" I suppose.

Well where did the partclies come from?

Ahmed IV wrote:Well you'll lose this argument Fang.

Ok, you wanted to change this topic to "Is evolution true?" I suppose.

Well where did the partclies come from?

is not particles Ahmed, they are cells. I say the chicken goes first because they either evolved from another animal or cells developed it. Besides, where did the egg come from anyway?

Okay...

For the last time... The egg came from a similar animal. It had a small mutation

Also, evolution is true!!!!!!!!!!!
If you're wondering how life started, it was probably because of an electrical discharge like... Lightning
Scientists have come very close to making life like that

Two chickens came first. The end.

Where did the chickens come from? 0.o

Cells coming together of course

where did the cells come from? 0.o

Fang wrote:Okay...

For the last time... The egg came from a similar animal. It had a small mutation

Also, evolution is true!!!!!!!!!!!
If you're wondering how life started, it was probably because of an electrical discharge like... Lightning
Scientists have come very close to making life like that

Fang...and where did the electrical discharge come from?

Fang, read Frankenstein by Mary Shelly about that electric discharge!

Fang wrote:Okay...

For the last time... The egg came from a similar animal. It had a small mutation

Also, evolution is true!!!!!!!!!!!
If you're wondering how life started, it was probably because of an electrical discharge like... Lightning
Scientists have come very close to making life like that

lol ... too much sci fi for you ...

No, it's true. Look it up. I swear.

ok then, who combined the body parts?

Have you heard of single celled organisms?

Eventually, over billions of years if evolution, we are here

there is an electric impulse in our hearts (SAN or VAN in the heart)

And we use electricity to revive people if they died less than 3 minutes before the medics arive

Where did electricty come from Fang?

from that machine....going back to water and lightening...ok?

Ancient references to the dilemma are found in the writings of classical philosophers. Their writings indicate that the proposed problem was perplexing to themselves and was commonly discussed by others of their time as well.
Aristotle (384-322 BC) was puzzled by the idea that there could be a first bird or egg and concluded that both the bird and egg must have always existed:

If there has been a first man he must have been born without father or mother – which is repugnant to nature. For there could not have been a first egg to give a beginning to birds, or there should have been a first bird which gave a beginning to eggs; for a bird comes from an egg.

The same he held good for all species, believing, with Plato, that everything before it appeared on earth had first its being in spirit."^[2]
Plutarch (46-126 AD) referred to a hen rather than simply a bird. His is Moralia in the books titled "Table Talk" discussed a series of arguments based on questions posed in a symposium. Under the section entitled, "Whether the hen or the egg came first," the discussion is introduced in such a way suggesting that the origin of the dilemma was even older:

...the problem about the egg and the hen, which of them came first, was dragged into our talk, a difficult problem which gives investigators much trouble. And Sulla my comrade said that with a small problem, as with a tool, we were rocking loose a great and heavy one, that of the creation of the world..."^[3]

Macrobius (395–423 AD), a Roman philosopher, found the problem to be interesting:

You jest about what you suppose to be a triviality, in asking whether the hen came first from an egg or the egg from a hen, but the point should be regarded as one of importance, one worthy of discussion, and careful discussion at that."^[4]

Stephen Hawking and Christopher Langan argue that the egg came before the chicken, though the real importance of the question has faded since Darwin's "On The Origin Of Species" and the accompanying Theory of Evolution, under which the egg must have come first.^[5][6]

The Theory of Evolution says that species change over time in the process of evolution. Since DNA can be modified only before birth, a mutation must have taken place at conception or within an egg such that an animal similar to a chicken, but not a chicken, laid the first chicken egg.^[7][8] In this light, both the egg and the chicken evolved simultaneously from birds who weren't chickens and didn't lay chicken eggs but gradually became more and more like chickens over time.
However, a mutation in one individual is not normally considered a new species. A speciation event involves the separation of one population from its parent population, so that interbreeding ceases; this is the process whereby domesticated animals are genetically separated from their wild forebears. The whole separated group can then be recognized as a new species.
The modern chicken was believed to have descended from another closely related species of birds, the red junglefowl, but recently discovered genetic evidence suggests that the modern domestic chicken is a descendant of both the red junglefowl and the grey junglefowl.^[9] Assuming the evidence bears out, a hybrid is a compelling scenario that the chicken-egg came before the chicken.

Could you reword that?