james bond
Gold Member
- Oct 17, 2015
- 13,407
- 1,803
- 170
Can these chickens survive? What do you think?
All we have now are dinosaur chicken nuggets.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
There is no good reason to think they would not hatch and survive. But ethical standards prohibit it, for now.
Wrong, actual photos of the actual skulls can be found, and the embryos were destroyed, per ethical guidelines. So no, you didn't actually think of any possible reasons. And , if you had educated yourself about the most basic facts of this topic, you would not have made those errors.They didn't survive or more likely they didn't "look" like a dinosaur (people would think it was still a chicken), so the atheist scientists put up an artist's representation.
Wrong, actual photos of the actual skulls can be found, and the embryos were destroyed, per ethical guidelines. So no, you didn't actually think of any possible reasons. And , if you had educated yourself about the most basic facts of this topic, you would not have made those errors.They didn't survive or more likely they didn't "look" like a dinosaur (people would think it was still a chicken), so the atheist scientists put up an artist's representation.
And the unfounded conspiracy theory you grifted from a creationist blog is utter nonsense and shows an abject ignorance of evolution and of DNA. Ancestors of an animal would be expected to have DNA not possessed by the extant animal. Only some fool with less than no knowledge of evolution or DNA would imply that DNA is "cumulative", which is the stupid, elementary error made by the charltan blogger.
Not as important as finally developing the boneless chicken. The white whale of food industry!....>>>
Here is a study on chicken embryos developing teeth:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982206000649
The pictures are very interesting.
For what? Be specific. Doing so would show that you have at least made an attempt to understand this material and are not wasting my time.Still waiting.
For what? Be specific. Doing so would show that you have at least made an attempt to understand this material and are not wasting my time.Still waiting.
By the way, chickens ARE dinosaurs, so try to keep that in mind.
The only "dispute"there is over the nomenclature. Is it a '"snout"? Scientists prefer more exact language and recoil at such hamhanded language. The scientists expressed traits of the chickens ancestors using genetic modification. Those traits resemble reptilians and past dinosaurs, as was to be expected, considering we know birds are the last extant dinosaurs.For what? Be specific. Doing so would show that you have at least made an attempt to understand this material and are not wasting my time.Still waiting.
By the way, chickens ARE dinosaurs, so try to keep that in mind.
That's what the evos say, but I will keep it in mind that "chickens ARE dinosaurs." Besides the dino chicken nuggets.
Here's an article that explains the problems that the scientists doing this experiment had. The snouts came out as beaks, but looked "confused."
Scientists Dispute Claims of Converting Bird Beaks Into Dinosaur Snouts | Evolution News
I'm out of my element here, but would think the scientists would try other body parts. "Reverse engineering," came out of software development so do know something about it. If the output is GIGO, then go to some other module or process. Basically, RE is for man-made objects and not natural objects so there may be problems changing chickens (such as moral ones) that is not encountered with man-made objects.