this question is bugging me for a long time, i still cant figure it out
2007-01-05 02:07:43 · 11 answers · asked by richard_so2001 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
LONDON, England -- It's a question that has baffled scientists, academics and pub bores through the ages: What came first, the chicken or the egg?
Now a team made up of a geneticist, philosopher and chicken farmer claim to have found an answer. It was the egg.
Put simply, the reason is down to the fact that genetic material does not change during an animal's life.
Therefore the first bird that evolved into what we would call a chicken, probably in prehistoric times, must have first existed as an embryo inside an egg.
Professor John Brookfield, a specialist in evolutionary genetics at the University of Nottingham, told the UK Press Association the pecking order was clear.
The living organism inside the eggshell would have had the same DNA as the chicken it would develop into, he said.
"Therefore, the first living thing which we could say unequivocally was a member of the species would be this first egg," he added. "So, I would conclude that the egg came first."
The same conclusion was reached by his fellow "eggsperts" Professor David Papineau, of King's College London, and poultry farmer Charles Bourns.
Mr Papineau, an expert in the philosophy of science, agreed that the first chicken came from an egg and that proves there were chicken eggs before chickens.
He told PA people were mistaken if they argued that the mutant egg belonged to the "non-chicken" bird parents.
"I would argue it is a chicken egg if it has a chicken in it," he said.
"If a kangaroo laid an egg from which an ostrich hatched, that would surely be an ostrich egg, not a kangaroo egg."
Bourns, chairman of trade body Great British Chicken, said he was also firmly in the pro-egg camp.
He said: "Eggs were around long before the first chicken arrived. Of course, they may not have been chicken eggs as we see them today, but they were eggs."
2007-01-05 02:12:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why is this in Astronomy & Space?
Technically the egg came first, because not only were other animals (reptiles/fish/etc) laying them before birds were even around, the chicken's evolutionary ancestor would have laid eggs.
If you mean chicken eggs only, then the chicken. The chicken in it's current form had to exist before the egg could be laid with it's own genetic data. While the chicken may have been slightly different to the chickens of today, it would still be a chicken - it's development wouldn't leap forward suddenly from, eg. a goose.
2007-01-05 10:12:56 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Had to be the chicken. The organism had to exist before the means of reproduction existed. Think about how a fertilized egg would come into being independent from two genetic contributors.
A LOT of people tend to think the first chicken was simply created and then laid the first egg.
2007-01-05 10:15:59 · answer #3 · answered by brainiac5 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The egg. Dinosaurs layed eggs long before chickens evolved.
2007-01-05 10:13:39 · answer #4 · answered by hcbiochem 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The chicken
2007-01-05 10:12:49 · answer #5 · answered by Tabitha 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Obviously, it was the chicken because the egg would have needed to be fertilized!
2007-01-05 10:14:14 · answer #6 · answered by serf_tide 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The chicken.
2007-01-05 10:16:01 · answer #7 · answered by Katie 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
the question isnt wich came first. the question is how are we gonna eat the egg & fry the chicken
2007-01-05 10:23:19 · answer #8 · answered by kris 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
If you believe in the evolution theory it may be the chicken.
2007-01-05 14:42:54 · answer #9 · answered by The TRUTH 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The egg.
All molecular change takes place at an embryonic level.
2007-01-05 10:14:40 · answer #10 · answered by Barrett G 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋