wrong.

internal fertilization and gestation (eg. give birth) has a higher survival rate compared to external fertilization (eg. fish) and external gestation (eg. eggs)

species that do internal gestation (most mammals) only exist later and is more evolutionary advanced.

to preempt the most common follow-up question of "then why dont chicken give birth if its much better?" - because laying eggs still works well enough for that level of existence.

To continue the explanation from religion thread, let's say humans lay eggs. Will there be any difference in your explanation based on your theory of creation or religious perspective? There is no difference, isn't it? It will be always the same no matter what, just like one's imagination. If it can explain everything whatever you can ever imagine, say humans divide like cells do, how do you know it is real because there is only 1 reality out there.

wow, im impressed by the selection of naturals .but human laying egg is not a bad idea though. how can we suggest to the naturals

but why there is only 2 kinds of gender : male and female .

i also wonder if we do got a species, but with the absence of the other gender,will the species extinct?

This post has been edited by azerroes: May 16 2010, 03:00 AM

there are hermaphrodites in nature also asexual also

No, it won't, there's a form of reproduction called parthenogenesis in which only one gender is required to reproduce, New Mexico whiptail for example has been documented to having exclusively females in the entire population, it reproduces solely through parthenogenesis...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cnemidophorus_neomexicanus

This post has been edited by CleverDick: Aug 18 2010, 01:10 AM

at the end, its only a combination of male and female. still 2 gender

wow, i never knew that. to prevent a species to extinct is this way. how can we make the creature turn to produce this way

btw, you make me more and more impressed on God creations. its just mind-blowing and surprising. and it just make me more deeply believe to my God . thanks fella

asexual has no gender, not two genders, and the example of parthenogenesis that i gave appears to have arisen naturally through the cross breeding of two distinct species, god has not been observed to play any significant role in the process...

you're welcome, if thinking this way makes you happier, go ahead...

This post has been edited by CleverDick: Aug 18 2010, 01:09 AM

hermaphrodite is not 2 gender....just an organism with both male and female reproductive organ allowing reproduction with just 1 parent

relate it to the topic, i wonder how much i impressed with the wisdom of God. still i can say that this chicken-egg thing is in the God knowledge. so powerful that He can make sea creature that have a body like fish give birth eg. whale.

to many things that i see in the world that i just assume its the will and power of god to determine it.

face it, we need the other gender ( not to mention i thank god for creating the other gender )

---

Added on May 16, 2010, 3:24 amcan you please understand my statement? is it possible for me to suggest the THIRD gender for human? currently we have male and female. so i want more. can or not?

This post has been edited by azerroes: May 16 2010, 03:24 AM

you never mentioned about that here :

last time i saw it on the newspaper which said gt a scientist found out that the chicken come 1st than the egg.
i oso dunno he made this statement based on wat prove.

You are begining to sound paranoid. Are you ok or are you just throwing tantrum around?

If you have already decided that all the things you see and experience are god, despite the contrary evidence or argument presented to you, which you dismissed without even an argument, I don't understand what is your point of posting here. You are not really interested in discussion or argue in a way people would be convinced. Are you here just to inflate your ego?

My apology for unable to reply sooner, was kind of bz lately.
This thread asked for which one came first, chicken or egg and not what was the source of origin of an egg or a chicken? By asking this question, it is off topic slightly as you are asking what was the source of the origin of life forms.

R u expecting me to "answer" this very puzzle of mankind? The origin of life which is still being discussed, debated and continuingly discovered in philosophy and science. What I have is only an opinion and some point of view.

There are two branches of philosophy and sciences that touch this, holism and reductionism.

Holism is the idea that all the properties of a given system (physical, biological, chemical, mental, etc.) cannot be determined or explained by its component parts alone. The general principle of holism was summarized by Aristotle in the metaphysics: "The whole is more than the sum of its parts".

A chicken or an amoeba is alive simply because the system as a whole determines and control how the parts behave. The consciousness or life exists because of this interaction between parts.

When you go down town and look at a huge neon light/LED display board showing an actor (says Brad Pitt) on the screen, do you think the actor's soul goes inside the screen? Else why do you think he is Brad Pitt and not your neighbour John? The screen is merely consist of billions of light bulb/LED. This is where holism comes in, when billions of dots combined together,"the whole" gives raise a new attribute, which is a person called Brad Pitt. However, when you try to study each dots that produce this body, Brad Pitt can never be found from each of the dots.

On the other hand, reductionism is sometimes seen as the opposite of holism. Reductionism in science says that a complex system can be explained by reduction to its fundamental parts. For example, the processes of biology are reducible to chemistry and the laws of chemistry are explained by physics.

String theory
Look at the following, which is the smallest particle that exists: atom -> proton -> quark -> string
In different era, the smallest elimentary particle always being refined as sciences and technology progresses.

Under string theory, proton, electron, positron, boson, fermion (strong force, weak force), photon (EM wave), graviton (general and special theory) all these elements are identical fundementally and the only different is they are strings that vibrates in N dimensions, and thus give raise to the charge, mass, flavor differences.

If neutron, electron, proton (particle), graviton (gravity) and light (photon) are all but the "same" elements, What is the different between says a chicken to an amoeba as they are from the very same elementary particles. The interaction (the orientation, the force) between these strings are unique and gave raise to all different objects and life forms that we observed today.

This is what M-Theory (supersting theory) suggested, as part of the initiative to combine all the four forces (as above) into one Theory Of Everything (TOE).

For your question, what is the source of origin of an egg, what about the egg was raised as a result of many different strings (proton, positron, electron, neutron) with different orientation and different forces that combines become protein structure (the hardware, body) and nucleic acids (the software, DNA) and forms an egg?

And this different combination and orientation of elimentary particles forms different life forms we observed today.

If you are interest, please take a look at the following book "What Is Life" by Erwin Schrodinger, a famous physicist in quantum mechanic. There are many relationship between life and quantum mechanic, and quantum mechanic provides a very good mechanism to explain life itself.

So your next question is how did the first string or first few strings exists?

This post has been edited by nice.rider: May 19 2010, 05:11 PM