Funny

13846 readers

2070 users here now

General rules:

Be kind.
All posts must make an attempt to be funny.
Obey the general sh.itjust.works instance rules.
No politics or political figures. There are plenty of other politics communities to choose from.
Don't post anything grotesque or potentially illegal. Examples include pornography, gore, animal cruelty, inappropriate jokes involving kids, etc.

Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

TheDude@sh.itjust.works

kersploosh@sh.itjust.works

example@reddthat.com

VicksVaporBBQrub@sh.itjust.works

840

Just so there's no confusion (lemmy.ml)

submitted 2 days ago by cm0002@toast.ooo to c/funny@sh.itjust.works

107 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] the_mighty_kracken@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Everyone here seems to be missing the point of the question. The chicken isn't the key point. It stands in for all egg laying animals. To rephrase the question: how is it possible that an early species was able to develop egg laying abilities, considering the problem of that animal not having been born from an egg? I suspect the real answer has something to do with fish ...

[–] tetris11@feddit.uk 2 points 8 hours ago

Shells are soft gloopy things laid in lakes
Evolutionary advantage: Eggs laid on the edge of lakes away from water predators
Evolutionary advantage: Harder eggs survive longer further out of water
Evolutionary advantage: Harder land eggs give rise to amphibous/land animals
Evolutionary advantage: Amphibous/land animals lay land eggs
etc.