Top ten 'unanswerable' questions....

Soldato
Joined
21 Mar 2003
Posts
4,651
Location
Nottingham
1 What is the meaning of life? 27 (the universe and everything, make up the remaining 15)

2 Is there a God? No, he did exist, but disappeared in a puff of logic.

3 Do blondes have more fun? Only at the weekends, the rest of the week, we make fun of the blondes for the things they did during said weekend.

4 What is the best way to lose weight? Don't eat all the pies.

5 Is there anybody out there? Yes, but they know better than to answer

6 Who is the most famous person in the world? Muhammed

7 What is love? The period of time, between meeting a beautiful woman, and realising that she looks like a haddock.

8 What is the secret to happiness? Can't tell you, its a secret.

9 Did Tony Soprano die? Yes

10 How long will I live? right up until the moment you die
 
Soldato
Joined
5 Jun 2005
Posts
20,772
Location
Southampton
Tony Soprano ? he was alive in the last seance was he not? so surely the answer is no?


There is no actual evidence that anything bad was about to happen -- just people in a diner who we suspected were bad because we watch a lot of movies.

There is no way way that anyone with a motive to kill Tony knew that he'd be at that diner.

The Sopranos never relied on off-screen action and secret twists. We were privy to everything. It was filmed in the third-person omniscient. The theory of a surprise killer violates the show's narrative structure.

The show didn't romanticize violence. Violence was dirty, casual and explicit. The murder of its protagonist wouldn't be softened by climactic, artful, debatable twist.

If David Chase wanted to kill him, we would've seen Tony blue and gagging on his own blood.

The show rarely offered closure. What makes you think it would start in the final episode?

Just desserts were not a theme.

The makers filmed an ending implying that he was shot, then rejected it.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
22 Jul 2010
Posts
1,369
Location
Sheffield
That's been answered recently. Scientists have determined that the shell of the chicken egg cannot be formed without a protein produced by the chicken - so the chicken must have come before the egg.....

Even so i'd still argue it the other way around. A chicken by definition has to have hatched from an egg so if it didnt come from an egg then thats no chicken. Also there is nothing in the question that states it was a chickens egg so (going on preschool style evolution) if the prechicken thingy that didnt have all the dna of a chicken laid an egg that lead to the chicken then it was the egg that brought the first chicken as the weird chicken monster before cant be classed as what we know as a chicken.
 
Soldato
Joined
14 Apr 2006
Posts
3,699
Location
Nottingham
Even so i'd still argue it the other way around. A chicken by definition has to have hatched from an egg so if it didnt come from an egg then thats no chicken. Also there is nothing in the question that states it was a chickens egg so (going on preschool style evolution) if the prechicken thingy that didnt have all the dna of a chicken laid an egg that lead to the chicken then it was the egg that brought the first chicken as the weird chicken monster before cant be classed as what we know as a chicken.

Putting this in better terms...

Dinosaurs laid eggs... chickens hadn't evolved until later on... done :p
 
Permabanned
OP
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Posts
0
Removing dinosaurs as a broad term...

Velociraptors laid eggs... They were around before chickens... Regardless of whether chickens descended from velociraptors or whoever... They are a different species, but the egg concept came first! ;)

I agree with you, thankfully the concept of a full English didn't come first otherwise they would be in trouble.
 
Back
Top Bottom