I don't believe the egg eating was anything more than hunger and I don't think this list is a place to try to prove "Theory" that a whole lot of smarter people have been doing for some time now. and yet it's still a "Theory."
JerryB
I took his evolution theory as light hearted, and I'm sure that's how he intended it.
As for the "Theory" of evolution, the National Academy of Sciences published a small book on the subject for K-12 teachers recently. It states that religious and non-religious scientists alike consider the idea that evolution occurs, and has occurred, to be proven from so many angles that it is a fact. They then go on to explain why they still call it a theory even though it's a fact, much like Newton's theory of gravity is considered to be a fact. That we all evolved from common ancestors is considered factual, but there are millions of theories within the field that remain hypotheses. Most of these have to do with when "critter 1" branched from "critter 2", etc., and if critter 3 branched off a line before critter 4, or arose through hybridization of this to that, etc.., stuff like that.
They conclude with the idea that many scientists are religous and that's fine. But gods aren't testable ideas and therefore aren't science. In science class, kids should learn about evolution. Even all of the religious members of the National Academy signed off on this. They phrased it much nicer than I would have. All religions require blind faith and the propensity for people to embrace blind faith is one of the most frightening aspects of human nature.
Sorry, this is way off topic, but I couldn't help it. I promise I've said my peace and I won't argue it any further.