The Chicken Came Before The Egg

My opponent begins by trying to win the vote on a purely semantical argument. He has defined "egg" a certain way and believes that this alone wins him the debate. However his definition of "egg" does not fit in with his own arguments at all. Note his argument from embryonic development falls into an infinite regress because a chicken as he has defined it must come from the egg of another chicken. Thus his argument is not even in line with his own abusive definition. Thus if my opponent makes us stick with his own flawed definition of an egg, voters must vote Con in that Pro is logically unable to fulfill his burden of proof. But moving on to my opponent's refutation of my case, he tries to find fault specifically with P3. He writes:"To domesticate a bird Humans had to train a chicken (AKA Domesticate it) and thus then breed it to start a line of domesticated chickens. By my opponents very definition of the modern chicken he concedes that there first had to be a chicken that was domesticated before it could be bred meaning Pro wins in the instance of this evidence. "Here my opponent does not seem to understand the domestication process. To fully domesticate an animal, humans condition that animal over at least a few generations. So the first bird ,that would later produce offspring that would become the modern domesticated chicken, was not actually the first chicken, but the 'ancestor' who's descendants would become the first chickens. Humans did not take a bird and all of a sudden domesticate it. No, they conditioned it and it's descendants over many generations until the final product was what we would call a chicken. A bird did not hatch, and then was domesticated into a chicken. A bird hatched, and it and it's descendants were conditioned where a chicken was the final bi-product. My opponent's refutation fails in that he does not properly understand the domestication process. My opponent then extends only two of his arguments. I will refute his points thusly. #1: Embryonic DevelopmentHere, in order for my opponent to further his own case, he completely drops his evolutionary argument. He argues that a chicken egg can only come from a chicken and thus, the chicken must have come from the egg. I would ask that he bring actual evidence to support this claim, but my opponent has banned sources from this debate. So I will extend my refutation, that my opponent's argument leads to infinite regress and thus a chicken egg need not come from a chicken in that it leads to illogical conclusions. If a chicken egg can only come from a chicken, then whence come the original chicken? Note that my opponent has thrown out evolution as a source by arguing that chickens can only come form chickens and so he rejects the speciation theory or evolution. Now on to my opponent's final point. #2 EvolutionMy opponent in this point argues that because we are not allowed to use evidence, my entire argument from an evolutionary bi-product simply relies on "trust" and thus we must accept his own illogical line of thinking. However when we look at my own argument from evolution, we can see that because evolution explains almost every species origins as coming from another, and because there is no logical line of thinking to suggest that chickens are any different, my own explanation is the most logical and does not rely on mere "trust". We can also see that my opponent has completely dropped his evolutionary argument here. In conclusion, the arguments vote should clearly go to Con in that my opponent's only arguments rest on either an illogical line of infinite regress or a misguided attempt to shift the burden of proof even as I have met it. My opponent has completely dropped his own evolutionary line of thinking to argue that a chicken egg can only come from a chicken. I showed logically that this line of thinking is fallacious in that one would logically get strung up in an infinite regress because my opponent has not shown where the first chicken came from. I however have shown that through speciation, a breed of bird came about that was later domesticated over several generations, and would become the modern chicken. I have clearly upheld the burden of proof that my opponent has failed to and thus I urge a Con vote.