2006-09-23 10:28:31 · 23 answers · asked by branchcaptain 3 in Education & Reference ➔ Words & Wordplay
Hmm, this is a chicken and egg question ;)
But, it has been solved by British scientists recently. they say first there was the egg, and then came the chicken.
2006-09-23 22:23:39 · answer #1 · answered by Earthling 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The chicken of course. That evolution argument is ridiculous. What kind of stupid bird would EVER want to evolve into a CHICKEN? Seriously, what advantage does the chicken have over other birds? Could it be possible that a fish accidentally laid an egg with a chicken(mutated fish) fetus in it. Maybe the fish got too close to some underwater uranium or something...
2006-09-27 17:11:09 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The egg came first. Here is why: all chickens came from eggs, but the first egg from which a chicken hatched, did not necessarily come from a chicken. The animal that laid the first egg that developed into a chicken was extremely close, but not 100 % chicken. It mated with another animal that was extrememly close, but again not 100 %. By combining their DNA in a unique, new way, the first chicken was created.
Even if one believes in Intelligent Design, which I do, new combinations of DNA to form new species still happen.
2006-09-23 17:39:38 · answer #3 · answered by L96vette 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well... make the basic assumption that the final form of the chicken came after countless (though not infinite) number of generations. Presume a spontaneous mutation of chicken dna, through cosmic radiation uv or random mutation. Then the chicken that is alive to mutate the gene must have preceded his/her descendents.... SO.... the egg with the mutated gene DEFINITELY came before the chicken. Which was a result of the genetic mutation carried by one donor in the EGG.
2006-09-23 19:46:33 · answer #4 · answered by Larry L 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Chicken
2006-09-23 18:56:48 · answer #5 · answered by Ironhand 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No matter which way you approach the question, it has to be the chicken. An egg by itself could not reproduce into a chicken even if fertilized. So it would have to be a chicken. Religiously, the same answer, God created animals, not eggs.
2006-09-23 17:32:21 · answer #6 · answered by oklatom 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There are no eggs without not A chicken, but a chicken AND a rooster,at least not fertile eggs with a chicken to keep them warm 'till they hatch. Me, I find the Creationist viewpoint to make the most sense-God made chickens & roosters and they made eggs, simple logic. Try on line the Creation Research Institute.
2006-09-23 17:33:01 · answer #7 · answered by gettin'real 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
i think they had this question's answer established a few years back...it was the chicken which would be in keeping with ALL of the theories out there (creationism, evolutionism, etc.). god had to create a chicken to lay the egg, but the micro-organism that developed into a chicken didn't come from an egg, the chicken just sort of "morphed" into being i suppose. that's my input. thanks for the points!
2006-09-23 17:32:24 · answer #8 · answered by vrandolph62 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The dinosaur came first...who then laid an egg...but the egg turned out to be a chicken and not a dinosaur...the dinosaur was then cast out because it had given 'birth' to a misfit. The chicken then grew up and became a sniper and killed all the left over dinosaurs and started to search for it's mother...who in the meantime, had laid more chicken eggs...all the chickens then took over the dinosaurs...that's how the dinosaurs died.
I'm bored...can you tell?
2006-09-23 17:40:07 · answer #9 · answered by moonlight1811 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
That's like asking which came first Man or Woman? of course God created the chicken first Geniuses In the bible will explain the answer
2006-09-23 17:37:31 · answer #10 · answered by My dad ate my homework 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋