Oh yes. But you also need to add all the academics teaching that the chicken came first, and all the science journals that have declared that the other view is unscientific and only “the chicken came first” papers will be published and anything else won’t even get to peer review. Science marches on! But only within its own version of a PC box.
Nah, that’s unfair, 99% of science — physics, chemistry, aerodynamics, etc. — doesn’t have that problem, it’s just certain areas that have gone beyond the proper bounds of science (hence the demarcation problem) or involve big business and all that money.
It’s not good when 8 of the 11 authors of a published paper on “room temperature superconductors” ask that the publication be withdrawn due to “problems” with the data. It gives science a bad name when publish-or-perish takes precedence over fact. If you want to deal with gray areas, become a politician.
Crest has been shown to be an effective decay-preventive dentifrice, that can be of significant value when combined with a conscientiously-applied program of oral hygiene and regular professional care.
Council on Dental Therapeutics – American Dental Association…
Learned the above from the box of a tube of Crest toothpast, back in 1963.
And the ‘of significant value’ part simply means that it’s better to brush your teeth than not brush them. LOL – that would be true if one used zero toothpaste and just brushed them…
My faith in Dr. Mel, mad scientist, was almost restored. There he is, in panel two, refuting Brewster’s ignorance of the scientific method. Then I foolishly went on to panel three . . .
The chicken or the egg controversy has always struck me as so. extremely. goofy. It’s like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. My answer: “Why would angels want to dance on the head of a pin in the first place?”
Honestly, some questions are simply stupid from the outset.
I mean think about it: saying the egg came first is assuming the mutation occurred in the egg… and not in the chicken that laid it. There is nothing that states mutation occurs at any specific time or moment. Further, this question exists only if one believes that evolution is absolute fact (rather than theory), and has no validity if one believes in intelligent creation.
So, goofy question. For those of faith it has no relevance at all. And for evolutionists, since the point of mutation cannot be established, there is no answer to this questions.
My recommendation: do something more valuable with one’s limited days on this earth. Even watching cartoons would be more educational than the silly debate about chickens and eggs. ;D
Izzy Moreno over 1 year ago
Yep.
ekke over 1 year ago
Yeah, but the typical grant is how many exponentials beyond $20?
Flashaaway over 1 year ago
Wrong, it was the egg. On the planet long before feathers.
Panufo over 1 year ago
Touché, Rickard.
My First Premium Member over 1 year ago
Just ask Faucci.
Lenavid over 1 year ago
Definitely how Climate Change science works…
ekw555 over 1 year ago
that’s how we all work.
for pay.
DaBump Premium Member over 1 year ago
Oh yes. But you also need to add all the academics teaching that the chicken came first, and all the science journals that have declared that the other view is unscientific and only “the chicken came first” papers will be published and anything else won’t even get to peer review. Science marches on! But only within its own version of a PC box.
Nah, that’s unfair, 99% of science — physics, chemistry, aerodynamics, etc. — doesn’t have that problem, it’s just certain areas that have gone beyond the proper bounds of science (hence the demarcation problem) or involve big business and all that money.
steveconkey2003 over 1 year ago
That’s exactly why “scientists” and the media push climate change daily.
geese28 over 1 year ago
Of course that’s how science works…..only with several more zeros
James Gifford Premium Member over 1 year ago
Well, it’s the rooster, but not in a family strip.
blakerl over 1 year ago
It’s still the Egg.
Teresa Burritt (Frog Applause) creator over 1 year ago
Money talks.
PoodleGroomer over 1 year ago
Nope.
mistercatworks over 1 year ago
It’s not good when 8 of the 11 authors of a published paper on “room temperature superconductors” ask that the publication be withdrawn due to “problems” with the data. It gives science a bad name when publish-or-perish takes precedence over fact. If you want to deal with gray areas, become a politician.
cuzinron47 over 1 year ago
In other words, for a price, I’ll tell you what you want to know.
newyorkslim over 1 year ago
Ouch! sad but true.
Buckeye67 over 1 year ago
Bad enough that Dr. Mel is a mad scientist, but he is a cheap mad scientist to boot.
Bilan over 1 year ago
Trump science: Trump says he doesn’t believe it, the Republicans say that all of the science contradicting him is wrong.
exitseven over 1 year ago
Thats how global warming works.
David Huie Green LoveJoyAndPeace over 1 year ago
All things being equal, money introduces an inequality.
FireAnt_Hater over 1 year ago
Crest has been shown to be an effective decay-preventive dentifrice, that can be of significant value when combined with a conscientiously-applied program of oral hygiene and regular professional care.
Council on Dental Therapeutics – American Dental Association…
Learned the above from the box of a tube of Crest toothpast, back in 1963.
And the ‘of significant value’ part simply means that it’s better to brush your teeth than not brush them. LOL – that would be true if one used zero toothpaste and just brushed them…
norphos over 1 year ago
Sadly it is as easy to buy a scientist as it is to buy a politician. Scientists tend to agree with whomever is providing their funding.
stamps over 1 year ago
Fill out this grant form..
Ink blot Premium Member over 1 year ago
The egg came first — it was laid by an almost-but-not-quite-fully-evolved near-chicken creature.
paullp Premium Member over 1 year ago
My faith in Dr. Mel, mad scientist, was almost restored. There he is, in panel two, refuting Brewster’s ignorance of the scientific method. Then I foolishly went on to panel three . . .
R.U. Kidding over 1 year ago
More like $20 million.
Snoots over 1 year ago
The chicken or the egg controversy has always struck me as so. extremely. goofy. It’s like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. My answer: “Why would angels want to dance on the head of a pin in the first place?”
Honestly, some questions are simply stupid from the outset.
I mean think about it: saying the egg came first is assuming the mutation occurred in the egg… and not in the chicken that laid it. There is nothing that states mutation occurs at any specific time or moment. Further, this question exists only if one believes that evolution is absolute fact (rather than theory), and has no validity if one believes in intelligent creation.
So, goofy question. For those of faith it has no relevance at all. And for evolutionists, since the point of mutation cannot be established, there is no answer to this questions.
My recommendation: do something more valuable with one’s limited days on this earth. Even watching cartoons would be more educational than the silly debate about chickens and eggs. ;D