Mythbusters tested them and revealed they are moderately accurate. Well, at least accurate more than 50% of the time.

Come to think of it, being able to read context between the lines and body language would do the same thing with exactly the same, if not better, success rates.

It's likely more psychological than anything else.

What came first the chicken or the egg?

The egg.

Correct. Here is why:

The question does not denote a chicken or an egg. It says the. So we are talking about one chicken or egg. This was one object that was both. The chicken came from the egg, so that is the answer.

What? I concluded it was correct because the question never said the first egg hatched a chicken, and beings that aren't chickens but came from eggs, scientifically, seemed to have come from eggs.

Actually, it all started with a bacterium.

Aside from considering the meaning to be "any sort of egg", the reason the [chicken] egg came first is because mutations don't occur as the egg hatches. The first organism to be genetically identifiable as a being of the species "chicken" was laid as a mutated egg from some other species that was almost but not quite a chicken.

Sorry, creationists.

You mean [mutant egg] a bacterium.

No.

But the chicken came from the egg, which came from a bacterium. Which came first: the universe, or the particle of infinite energy?

I'm assuming you're talking about the big bang. It didn't really start with a "particle of infinite energy"; it was more like a singularity of infinite potential. And because the big bang not only gave us the universe, but time as well, the latter would probably be technically right. However, it depends on your view of the genesis of the big bang. Some cosmologists would say that a universe came first, if not necessarily our universe. Also, that starts becoming less of a thought experiment 'puzzle', and more of a philosophical or scientific question.

But isn't the multiverse infinite in all aspects?

It depends on the multiverse in question. Under M-theory, no, the concept of a higher-level encompassing paraverse (I like that term a lot better, though I believe I might have made it up) is limited. However, the Marvel Comics multiverse is obviously unlimited, as Spiderman somehow has the ability to be unmarried and pretty much wish away over twenty years of canon in a single four-part storyline. Doof.

Marvel vs. M-Theory. Hard decision. What does the M stand for?

On the other hand, isn't Marvel a reliable resource? Well, at least the people at HtUW think so.

Marvel, obviously. (Actually "membrane", but more commonly just "m").
HtUW?

How the Universe Works. Well, I guess we are all in favor of Marvel.

I was going to go with: A chicken's egg can not be created without a chicken's reproductive organs.

But there was no chicken without the mutant egg.

Well any chicken that is given birth to will not be an exact copy of it's parents. Therefore it will no longer be a chicken. This same analogy works with mammals, where it is easier to understand.

Here comes evolution! Now I ask the question for life (for the economists out there): If a bat and a ball together cost $1.10, and the bat is $1 more than the ball, how much is the ball?
<hint>The answer is not 42.</hint>

Oh, god. Algebra flashbacks. I'm going to say the ball costs nickel.

Bat+ball=1.10
ball+1=B
ball+ball+1=1.10
ball(2)=.10
ball=.05

nickle