What came first the chicken or the egg?

The real question is.. "What came first, the Chicken or the Chicken Egg" because eggs were about before chickens.
/grins

reply to post by nuke_c

---

Actually what came first was an almost-chicken, who laid an almost-chicken egg, which contained a chicken.

so you say a whole..adult mutant chicken was born as a adult?

Because even a mutant baby..can't fend for itself.
and would have died way before it could have laid a egg.

just asking

[edit on 16-9-2008 by beforetime]

i will try to explain better..or coherent for you.

you said the egg came first.

i said that whole article on egg's you showed us...pertains to the idea it pass's threw a body or host.

therefore there is no way a egg could be first..if it has to come from a body as the source.
to start with.

now do you understand what i am saying?

have you ever seen a egg magically appear with no source ?
the egg layer.

but then again have i ever seen a chicken pop out of dirt or even a mutant one lol.
so i don't know lol
BTW.
There is no right or wrong answer..if so we would have already known the answer.
so don't get all bent out of shape plz lol

[edit on 16-9-2008 by beforetime]

reply to post by beforetime

---

Your idea of "mutant" is probably more like Toxie the Toxic Avenger, whereas I am using it in the sense that we are all mutants - none of our DNA is exactly the same as our parents (as it can't be, as our DNA comes from two people who don't have identical DNA).

I'm saying that a creature similar to, but not genetically-identical to, a modern chicken, once laid an egg. In that egg was a chick, which now had all the genetic traits of the modern chicken. It was 99.99999999% the same as its parents (it wasn't green with extra wings and glowing eyes), so it would be as safe as any other chicken out there today.

In fact, we know this has happened, as we have chickens.

reply to post by beforetime

---

There is a right answer, you just don't know it. It is somewhat arrogant to assume the entire world's knowledge resides in your head. The chicken/egg 'debate' is only interesting if you don't understand the theory of evolution. Once you do, it's obviously very easy.

Kind of like saying 'I don't know what 1,232,453,233,545,050 x 3,420 is, so therefore there is no answer'. Pretty silly, huh?

ok name me one fowl or bird alive today

that can be hatched and from birth/hatch it can fend for itself.
i know of no such bird that can.
it will die shortly after death because they can't gather food.

now what would be the odd's of 2 mutant bird's..finding themself in the world.
the earth is a big place.

then explain in detail how could 2 of your mutant bird exist that was never hatched to start with.
or vise versa

it can't be done if so Dave we would have to know evolution to be a fact .. when we know it is theory.
big difference

[edit on 16-9-2008 by beforetime]

Obviously it had to be the egg, because you can't have a chicken without an egg, but you can have an egg without a chicken.

So I say the egg.

It is my opinion that 'first' egg did not come from a chicken, nor did it come from an animal close to a chicken and then mutate or evolve into a chicken. It was designed and brought here.

That's my take on it.

... the egg came first. simple as that. As with all through evolution, a mutated version of the past species grew to withstand the obsticles that the past species couldnt. which meens that two Somethings mated, and produced a semi different, semi more advanced something.

I believe the chicken wouldve come from the egg.

Eggs implify the symbol of creation. Something being born. Why would a chicken just pop up out of no where?

Maybe a chain of events created the egg. But a chicken wouldnt just magically appear

I saw a documentary about a French discovery of a butterfly bone in the base of the head that apparently tilts for no reason after so many generations producing a different angle of head to shoulders - form ape to human for example

I wish I had recorded the documentary because I could have given you the references to investigate this further

basically what I got form the doco is this

the zillions of genes in the genetic code that we think are not being used actually have instructions in them that might have gone a little like this

for the first 2 billion years the only creatures on earth were the trillobytes and after that some of the trillobytes gave birth to another sort of trillobyte that no longer could mate with the mother's generation of trillobytes so these became a seperate species. for the new species to be viable you would need a minimum of 200 individuals born at the same time.

the information is locked up in our genetic code and suddenly the instruction says that the offspring of the parents will now be a different species and the original species might continue or might not. The original species might have some offspring that are the new species and some offspring that are the old species.

You think about Darwin's theory of natural selection and it is truthful up to a point but we know that as soon as we humans have a baby with small mutations such as an extra chromosome, it is called down's syndrome and usually is also sterile [but not always] so deffinitely small mutations do not produce a completely seperate species - only a better adapted individual of its own kind.

for a new species to evolve it would take some instruction in the genetic code of parent species to suddenly breed enough offspring that cannot mate with the parent's species but can mate with others that were also born with that mutation.

therefore which came first - the chicken or the egg? the egg was laid by another species and brought up as one of its own and when all grown up formed a new colony of others who were also born to be the new type of hen or rooster.

a little like we transfer by IVF, embryos of endangered wild cat species to be gestated and born and mothered by domestic cats - but this is all coded in the DNA sequence so it happens naturally at some pre destined time that we dont fully understand as yet.

anyone else know the documentary i am referring to? I would love to watch it again

reply to post by kinglizard

---

I'm in agreement with you kinglizard, not only is it the truth, but it could be the only way.............( and the people flame him alive for that remark)......IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII.