Saturday Funnies - 4pm Edition

Cidu Bill on Jul 8th 2017

summer-nyer.PNG

orange.PNG

ouch-egg.PNG

performance-art.PNG

Filed in Batman, Bizarro, Comics That Made Us Laugh Out Loud, New Yorker, Superman, comic books, comic strips, comics, humor, lol | 14 responses so far

14 Responses to “Saturday Funnies - 4pm Edition”

  1. James Schend Jul 8th 2017 at 04:13 pm 1

    Superman in cargo shorts is the funniest thing up there.

  2. larK Jul 8th 2017 at 04:34 pm 2

    That chicken one is seriously …disturbing.

  3. mitch4 Jul 8th 2017 at 04:35 pm 3

    Even supposing an ordinary hen (what is the term for the common chicken species?) and an ostrich could have viable offspring, we are faced with the question of whether egg formation is governed by the mother hen’s genetics or the baby chick’s. Perhaps a farmer or biologist in the group can give an informed answer. My uninformed guess would be that it’s governed by the hen’s genes. Clearly the cartoon supposes it is the chick’s, or a combination.

    The question has wider significance, however. It could give an evolutionary answer to the “which came first”question. That is, if we allow a single-generation genetic change producing a chicken chick from proto-chicken parents. Then the egg was a proto-chicken egg, controlled by the egg-formation program in the genes of the proto hen. While the chick that hatches will be a for-real chicken.

    Thus, the chicken came before the egg.

    (The traditional question doesn’t quite say “the chicken or the chicken egg” but we can safely complete it that way.)

  4. billybob Jul 8th 2017 at 04:44 pm 4

    It’s governed by the size of the hen’s uterus.

  5. Mona Jul 8th 2017 at 04:57 pm 5

    I could make an Arlo comment regarding the eternal chicken/egg question and the hen and ostrich affair, but I won’t.
    I enjoyed the swat-team variation on the knock-knock joke.
    The top one reminded me of UPS drivers.

  6. Boise Ed Jul 9th 2017 at 04:54 pm 6

    mitch4 [3]: It’s an interesting question. Most any female bird is a hen, but how does one specify a hen among barnyard chickens? Similarly, many species have females called cows, but how does one specify a cow among cattle? Your further points are also good food for thought.

    billybob [4]: By the time the egg is formed, it’s too late for that. Poor “Shelia.”

  7. James Pollock Jul 9th 2017 at 05:52 pm 7

    “The question has wider significance, however. It could give an evolutionary answer to the “which came first”question. ”

    While the question remains a viable philosophical question, the scientific question is rather cut and dried. Reptiles were laying eggs LONG before there were any chickens.

  8. James Pollock Jul 9th 2017 at 05:53 pm 8

    “how does one specify a hen among barnyard chickens?”

    The rooster knows.

  9. zookeeper Jul 9th 2017 at 08:14 pm 9

    Sheila and The Regrets - band name.

  10. tigalilee Jul 10th 2017 at 09:27 am 10

    DEAR GAH that chicken one is gonna be a hard image to shake!

  11. Brian in STL Jul 10th 2017 at 01:16 pm 11

    The Kiwi birds of New Zealand, which are of similar size to chickens, have a very large egg in proportion to body size.

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6c/KiwiEggRatio.svg/255px-KiwiEggRatio.svg.png

  12. Meryl A Jul 11th 2017 at 02:15 am 12

    The chicken came first.

    No where in the Bible does it say that God created eggs, but he did create all manner of animals - including the chicken, so therefore the chicken came first.

  13. James Pollock Jul 11th 2017 at 03:08 am 13

    “No where in the Bible does it say that God created eggs, but he did create all manner of animals - including the chicken, so therefore the chicken came first.”

    At the risk of offending your theology, but… your conclusion is not supported by your citation.
    God may have “created” chickens by causing eggs to manifest, from which baby chickens emerged. (Yes, that conclusion is ALSO not supported by Scriptural citation.)
    And that’s even BEFORE we get to the part where I point out that the inerrancy of Biblical text is assumed (by people who so assume) rather than proven.

    I mean, some religious folk get themselves all tied up in a lather insisting that evolution can’t be true, despite the fact that it and its effects are readily observable, because they imagine that the Bible says there’s no evolution. But it doesn’t say that.
    There’s lots of these, too. Ask people what Eve tempted Adam with, and most folks will say “an apple”. But that’s not what the Bible says, and apples don’t grow well in the Holy Land… oops, did one myself. The Bible doesn’t specify where, exactly, the Garden of Eden was located… mabe it was in or near Judah… or maybe just outside London, or not even on the face of the Earth at all.

  14. Meryl A Jul 18th 2017 at 03:02 am 14

    James Pollock - Mostly intended as a joke as if it would actually prove the matter.

Comments RSS

Leave a Reply