Board 8 > Here is a very TRICKY RIDDLE that is dividing the INTERNET!! Can you solve it??.

(+) Yeah! (+)

This tricky riddle has stumped the internet yet again and has gone viral as people have various answers to this..but only one is the true answer. can you figure it out? without cheating or just picking the most popular answer of course. so it would help if you post how you got your answer unless it's a guess.....

https://i.imgur.com/Gh9z344.jpg
---

This is a stupid riddle and the person who created it should feel bad about how stupid it is.

---

4 + 3 + 5 = 12


---

Just taking the numbers at face value, 4 + 3 + 5 = 12, which is not an answer.

However, if the thief gave you eggs he stole from you, then it's just 3 + 5 since the thief kept one for himself.

And then there's the fact that roosters can't lay eggs so one must question if those five are real.

So the answer can be:
12, if the eggs given weren't stolen from you and the rooster actually did lay eggs
8, if the thief gave you your own eggs and the rooster somehow laid eggs
7, if the rooster didn't lay eggs and the thief gave you eggs stolen from someone else
3, if you got your own eggs back and the rooster didn't lay anything

Ergo it can't be solved since we don't have enough information on where the thief got the eggs and whether or not the rooster is somehow able to lay eggs.

The reason this is causing debate is because there are four different answers.
---

BlueCrystalTear posted...

Just taking the numbers at face value, 4 + 3 + 5 = 12, which is not an answer.

However, if the thief gave you eggs he stole from you, then it's just 3 + 5 since the thief kept one for himself.

And then there's the fact that roosters can't lay eggs so one must question if those five are real.

So the answer can be:
12, if the eggs given weren't stolen from you and the rooster actually did lay eggs
8, if the thief gave you your own eggs and the rooster somehow laid eggs
7, if the rooster didn't lay eggs and the thief gave you eggs stolen from someone else
3, if you got your own eggs back and the rooster didn't lay anything

Ergo it can't be solved since we don't have enough information on where the thief got the eggs and whether or not the rooster is somehow able to lay eggs.

The reason this is causing debate is because there are four different answers.

if it said "person" instead of thief the same logic applies. the only approach is to take it as written and punch anybody who tries to WELL ACKSHUALLY this in the face

---

I'm inclined to say it's 7 because of the rooster caveat but I feel like in common discourse that bit would be overlooked as misspeaking. I did consider the whole thief stealing from you bit but there's no particular reason to believe the thief stole from you (and if they did that opens a can of worms in the form of there's no particular reason to believe any specific number were stolen from you. There's no rule stating the thief had to have taken all 4. They could have just taken and returned the 3. Or taken 2 and gave back some other egg with them idk.)

So, yeah, gonna say 7 and claim barring someone here coming up with an angle I haven't considered that's compelling, that anything else is just assuming too much of the prompt.

---

NFUN posted...

if it said "person" instead of thief the same logic applies. the only approach is to take it as written and punch anybody who tries to WELL ACKSHUALLY this in the face

Right, but the reason "thief" was included was to make it clear that the eggs might've been stolen from you. The person who wrote it clearly intended there to be multiple answers and then posted it solely to stir debate. And of course, y'know....
---

I hate these things.

And I hate the other common "TRICKY MATH" bs where it uses pictures as variables, but then for the final equation it uses slightly different pictures than the ones that had been defined.

It's the worst kind of math, and I love math.

---

Roosters may not be able to lay eggs, but it's stated as a hypothetical, so if your rooster laid five eggs, I mean, I guess it laid five eggs

Who's to say that the 4 eggs you had, 3 weren't given to you by the thief originally. And then the egg-laying rooster decided to keep his own eggs, or the thief stole those eggs.

The riddle is nonsensical.

---

wow, can't believe duckbear would post some clickbait garbage

Paratroopa1 posted...

Roosters may not be able to lay eggs, but it's stated as a hypothetical, so if your rooster laid five eggs, I mean, I guess it laid five eggs

There's that too.

Like it's a trash "riddle" but I'm a sucker for these math-ish topics.

---

BlueCrystalTear posted...

Right, but the reason "thief" was included was to make it clear that the eggs might've been stolen from you. The person who wrote it clearly intended there to be multiple answers and then posted it solely to stir debate. And of course, y'know....

yes, and the person who wrote it is clearly a douchebag, so again, fuck them and their word games, don't make unsubstantiated inferences, and take it at face value

---

What's with the dashes at the ends of the lines? Those aren't subtraction signs somehow, are they? Grammatically, three dashes doesn't really make sense. Two would, and would invalidate the eggs by the thief as being among the four you have, but three doesn't really make sense.

---

azuarc posted...

What's with the dashes at the ends of the lines? Those aren't subtraction signs somehow, are they? Grammatically, three dashes doesn't really make sense. Two would, and would invalidate the eggs by the thief as being among the four you have, but three doesn't really make sense.

hyphens aren't emdashes! as a vgmgg player you should know this already

---

If they're hyphens, then what's an eggsand?

---

azuarc posted...

If they're hyphens, then what's an eggsand?

Abbreviation of egg sandwich

---

Answer is 4

It doesn't say the thief gave me three more, says the thief gave me three (of the four that I have), hence the hyphen

Roosters can't lay eggs

this is dumb


---

why would a thief give you your eggs

are you giving them an egg tax or something that compels them to produce said eggs

---

Grimlyn posted...

why would a thief give you your eggs

are you giving them an egg tax or something that compels them to produce said eggs

the thief stole the hens and is just trolling you by making it seem like they're generous when in reality these are the last eggs you'll ever see while they start their egg empire

---

I have 0 eggs but one hell of an omelet

---

if the proposition states my rooster laid 5 eggs, my rooster laid 5 eggs

screw the thief's inferior hen shit i got magical rooster eggs

---

Paratroopa1 posted...

Roosters may not be able to lay eggs, but it's stated as a hypothetical, so if your rooster laid five eggs, I mean, I guess it laid five eggs

Yes; exactly. The riddle cant just lie to you.

The answer is either 12 or this is dumb bullshit, fuck off
---

if someone told me my rooster laid eggs I wouldn't assume eggs were not produced, I'd think oh they must mean my hen

---

'Had four eggs' implies the past and can not be considered applicable to the present state of egg ownership. A thief has magnanimously given me 3 eggs, but they are a thief, so if I am a good samaritan, I can not claim ownership of these eggs until a future time wherein the law grants me such privilege. My one remaining source of egg lay with my magic rooster which has laid five, however I have not presently taken any of them so they must be counted towards the rooster's total and not mine.

Thus, it can be said that presently speaking, with the most honest reading of the statements as presented, I can surely conclude that 0 is the correct summation of all the eggs that I possess.

---

Rooster lol

Asnwer is 1
can only have 1 egg

---

one egg ONLY

---

The rooster could still lay eggs. If he were born a hen, but identified as a rooster, he would still be biologically capable of laying eggs. This is an actual thing to consider, and I think part of the riddle was meant to draw this out as a talking point in 2021 since we are already making progress toward acceptance movements. There are scenarios in the world where a female-to-male human gets pregnant. You don't call him a woman just because he was born a woman or because he's carrying a child his womb. He is a now a man.

This is an interesting question, because I think it draws out some of the deeper prejudices people have, even if they aren't aware they have them. I'm not saying that people are mean spirited for saying a rooster can't lay eggs, because it's a gut reaction with no malice for many people, but it's still something inside people nowadays that they need to work on. Everyone has some form of prejudice, but scenarios that help expose them can make the world a better place.

This is a pretty fascinating riddle because of it, and I'm surprised no one has brought it up yet.

---

looks like this TRICKY RIDDLE did, in fact, divide us

MZero posted...

Roosters can't lay eggs

this one clearly can. because the question says it did. i'm not going to accuse the question of lying. clearly we're in a hypothetical world where roosters can lay eggs.

the real mystery is why full throttle didn't even list any answers above 8

like

you've gotta at least put 12 as an answer??? even if it's a "trick"

"Hippos don't hatch from eggs."
"What did you just see, Lisa?"
"But they-"
"What did you just see?"

---

I have 9 which is also not an answer. I had 4 eggs (3 of which were given to me by a thief), and then my rooster laid 5 more. I suppose there's nothing indicating the rooster gave up possession of his eggs so possibly it's just 4

---

Answer could be 8. I "had" four eggs (but I don't anymore), then the thief gave me three eggs and the rooster laid five.

This is a very TRICKY RIDDLE that is dividing BOARD 8!!

I found an article. Its from last september, so I question duckbears use of the present tense in his title, but here it is:

https://www.republicworld.com/whatsapp-quizzes-and-puzzles/riddles/if-i-had-4-eggs-riddle-answer-to-the-baffling-riddle-that-is-going.html

its a trash riddle, and if this explanation is the intended answer its double trash because that explanation isnt even how English works

the website is Indian, which makes me wonder if the riddle originated there too and theres something getting lost in the translation or a person with an imperfect grasp of English came up with it
---

duckbear is basically the indian facebook meme of b8 so this checks out

Dels posted...

this one clearly can. because the question says it did. i'm not going to accuse the question of lying. clearly we're in a hypothetical world where roosters can lay eggs.

actually it says the rooster "laid five more". It doesn't not specify eggs

---

most think 7 or cant be solved
---

jokes on all of you as only 1 person got it right when the answer is 3!!

Most people figured out by the english that the wording of had means it is a fantasy number and roosters obviously dont lay eggs so the answer is obviously 3 because a kind thief gave him 3 eggs so that is the true and only answer according to the riddle creator
---

As much as I love the rare unicorn that is "two full throttle responses in the SAME topic".... The riddle creator is an idiot.

---

Blaine would be omega pissed if you told him this riddle

---

how is the past tense of "had" four eggs any different than the past tense of the thief "gave" me three

if having four eggs means it was in the past and doesn't count, then why does being given 3 mean it's the present now???

its not different

the clear reading of it is that the had four eggs just refers to the amount of eggs in this persons possession before the thief and rooster came into the situation. Nothing about had suggests the eggs have somehow disappeared or are any more hypothetical than the rest of the eggs in the riddle

you would only deduce the answer if you have the same specific questionable grasp of English and/or brain damage the guy who wrote the riddle has
---

The English reading of the question by anyone who isn't a moron is that you had four eggs, and now you either have more or less. Nobody with a double digit IQ (which I suppose excludes the riddle creator) would read it as anything else.

This riddle isn't clever. It's someone who thought they were clever, but were wrong. Much like the 'answer' to the riddle!

---

its clearly 12

---

I love this topic

---

What a trash "riddle"

---

the real riddle was the eggs we laid along the way

---