It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Chicken-and-Egg Mystery Finally Cracked

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Chicken-and-Egg Mystery Finally Cracked


www.foxnews.com

Published July 14, 2010 | The Sun

British scientists believe they have found the answer to an ages-old question: Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Scientists cracked the puzzle after discovering that the formation of eggs is possible only thanks to a protein found in chicken's ovaries. That means eggs have to be formed in chickens first.

The protein -- called ovocledidin-17 (OC-17) -- speeds up the development of the shell. Researchers from Sheffield and Warwick universities in England
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.thesun.co.uk




posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:14 PM
link   
Ok fellow ATSer's we have been dwelling on the gloom and doom of the world for awhile, so when I saw this I thought it may be a good break from Obama, Iran, oil spills, doomsday predictions, and such.

Although scientists say they have now determined the chicken did indeed precede the egg, I'm sure this is going to get into the age old creation or evolution discussion. So let's please be civil and see if we can ascertain just how did the chicken precede the egg with or without divine intervention.

My personal theories tend to get a bit complicated, as I lean towards part of the big bang theory, but I also believe that something or someone had to set that bang off. So I tend to believe that God set off the explosion and sat back and watched things take off from there (very simply put). But that still would not answer the question of how the chicken came before the egg as these scientists claim.

So my friends, what are your thoughts on this?

www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:18 PM
link   
I always thought the chicken came first! If the egg came first, who would sit on it to keep it warm? Lol

This is interesting, where the hell did that chicken come from? Can't wait until they find that one out.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:19 PM
link   
I have always thought that the chicken had to come first. If the egg came first there was nothing to incubate it.

Another thought - I see the glass as half full when you are pouring, and half empty when you are drinking.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:20 PM
link   
Answered the question? Hardly.

They have proven that you need a chicken to produce an egg. Uhh... we've all known that for quite some time. So, do they now just quit asking where the chicken came from?


Originally posted by Starbug3MY
I have always thought that the chicken had to come first. If the egg came first there was nothing to incubate it.


So where did the chicken come from, if it didn't hatch from an egg? And if it didn't hatch from an egg, is it really a chicken?

[edit on 7/14/2010 by Unit541]



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:20 PM
link   
so eggs didnt exist before chickens?

I thought insects and reptiles were the first egg inovators. the chicken is a moderday name for a birds genetic configuration.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Wayne60
 


Sorry to scramble your eggs but there is already an on going thread with a similiar title..started this am.

Peace



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:23 PM
link   
I'm not sure if they realize it or not, but
they have actually brought about more questions than answers.
Then again, maybe that's what they wanted to do.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Wertdagf
 


The same can be applied to any egg laying species you like...

Which came first?

The turtle or the egg?
The spider or the egg?
The gator or the egg?
The fish or the egg?
The _____ or the egg?



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by redeyedwonder
 


Thanks.
I didn't see it after doing a search, but that wouldn't be the first time.
I'll see if I can find it.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:26 PM
link   
Someone actually was paid to do this study?

Arent there better things scientists could be working on than answering this question? For some reason I have this feeling things like, oh, curing cancer, cleaning up oil, developing cleaner cars, etc... would be a much better use of our time and money than worrying about eggs and chickens.

This is almost as bad as the US government study a few years back about keeping kids from drowning in 5 gallon buckets. After almost a year of study it was concluded that the best way was to drill a hole in the bucket. Some people really have too much time and money on their hands.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:28 PM
link   
The source of the chicken is pretty obvious.
So obvious that I'm not going to share it so that everyone reading this thread has the opportunity to learn something
:

[edit on 7/14/2010 by Mike6158]



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wayne60
I'm not sure if they realize it or not, but
they have actually brought about more questions than answers.
Then again, maybe that's what they wanted to do.


Of course. How else do you justify applying for more grant money?



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Actually I never really worried about it much.

I'll eat them both.
Somebody pass me the giblet gravy please.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:35 PM
link   
I am well aware that I am kind of simple minded, so my view would have to be rather simplistic.

If you found a light blue egg in a nest in a tree, you might think it was a robin's egg. Even though you did not see the bird, you just assume it to be so.

My point being that you normally associate the egg having come from a certain type of bird, or other animals.

The "first" chicken egg had to come from a "proto-chicken", but this was not a fully developed chicken as we define them. However, you could still have to call this a proto-chicken egg because it had been lain by a "proto-chicken".

Then the first fully developed female chicken would then be the first to lay a chicken egg.

Therefore the chicken had to be first in order to lay a chicken egg.

[edit on 14-7-2010 by hdutton]



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Unit541
 


i would say that carring young inside you or with a protective shell would depend upon the predators and enviromental conditions because of natrural selection of mutation.....

but when the transition from single-cell to multi-cell occured is far more interesting of a question. because surely the multi-cell creature tried to survive and exist before its ability to reproduce itself or protect its offspring occured.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:39 PM
link   
Dumb, i answered that question a long time ago. You either have an egg, that created a chick, or a chicken appeared out of thin air with the ability to reproduce asexually.

Obviously the egg came first...the real question is...how much of my illegally taken tax dollars went into this wondrous research?!?!?!



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Wayne60
 


actually its obvious that through evolution the egg comes first what do i mean by this?

lets say dinosaurs some of them anyway evolved into birds or began to appaear with feathers which i believe some dinosaurs did evolve into birds not all jus certain species that was able to adapt

this is the nail in the coffin right here! take for example the hammerhead shark its parents werent hammerheads it was born mutated basically a freak amongst its peers but guess what happened that mutation overtook that species until all were hammerheads!

the chicken was born a freak amongst its peers a genetic mutation that took over until todays chickens were common
have a nice day



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by hdutton
 


Well put, but your "proto-chicken" doesn't answer the question.

Take the "chicken" out of the equation, and instead ask yourself:

What came first? The egg, or the life form that laid the egg.

or

What came first? The tree or the seed?

What about humans? To make a baby you need an egg and sperm. Oops... here come the creationists...

You see? It's not so simple as to just toss in a "proto-chicken" and call it solved.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wayne60
reply to post by redeyedwonder
 


Thanks.
I didn't see it after doing a search, but that wouldn't be the first time.
I'll see if I can find it.


That thread is here if you want to see what they thought...

ATS Link

[edit on 14-7-2010 by redeyedwonder]




top topics



 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join