English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

hey tell me,hey you

2007-01-23 19:23:00 · 20 answers · asked by jacob 1 in Entertainment & Music Jokes & Riddles

20 answers

so simple, hen.
b'cos eggs don't born they are being laid.

Ha Ha Ha

2007-01-23 19:49:01 · answer #1 · answered by babu 2 · 0 0

The chicken or the egg is a reference to the causality dilemma which arises from the expression "which came first, the chicken or the egg?". Since both the chicken and the egg create the other in certain circumstances (a chicken emerges from an egg; an egg is laid by a chicken) it is ambiguous which originally gave rise to the other. Purely logical attempts to resolve the dilemma result in an infinite regress, since an egg was caused by a chicken, which was caused by an egg, etc. Put simply, the reason is down to the fact that genetic material does not change during an animal's life. The solution may require an examination of syntax and may rely on verification from advances in modern genetic science. When used in reference to difficult problems of causality, the chicken and egg dilemma is often used to appeal to the futility of debate and lay it to rest.

Biological Answers

In this case, the egg is not assumed to be a chicken egg. In effect this changes the question to: "Which came first, a chicken or any egg".

From a cellular biology point of view this question can be answered quite easily. The egg came first because any female sex cell is called an egg.

If the egg is defined structurally as the hard shelled thing, and the chicken a feather covered animal, the answer is still simple. Evolutionary scientists believe the first hard shell egg was the amniotic egg laid around 300 million years ago, and was laid by the animal who was the link between amphibians and reptiles. One of the first dinosaurs that we know had feathers was the Archaeopteryx, and came much later. Modern birds would not arise until 150 million years ago, descending from theropod dinosaurs.

In this case, the first chicken must have been the mutated offspring of a proto-chicken that laid the egg containing the first true chicken. In any case, this creature hatched from a recognizable egg. After all, the question is purposefully ambiguous -- it is not, "Which came first, the chicken or the chicken egg?"

The crux of the matter is how to biologically define 'a chicken'. What level of genetic similarity or structural similarity determine whether an organism is a chicken? One can only define what was the first chicken after the fact, thus any definition of the first chicken becomes arbitrary. The question 'which came first?' ignores the complicated reality of speciation. The concept of species is an abstraction intended to categorize a broad swath of genomes and their subsequent phenomes. If one were to do away with approximate categories, each individual 'chicken' actually represents a unique genotype. Under this definition, if a 'chicken' possessing genome A were to lay an egg possessing genome B, then an egg of genome B is antecedent to an animal possessing genome B and that the parent--genome A--is antecedent to, yet different from the egg of genome B. Hence, in an absolute sense, the egg came before the 'chicken.'

According to the principles of speciation, neither the chicken nor the egg came first, because speciation does not occur in simple, obvious units. In fact, evolution is about a slow transition in an overall population. What qualifies as “chicken” (ignoring the many diverse modern types of chicken) involves a wide range of genetic traits (alleles) that are not encompassed in a single individual and continue to be modified from generation to generation.

The transition from non-chicken to chicken is a grey area in which several generations are involved, and therefore which includes many many chicken-and-egg events, with no one step representing the whole. Since the result of the process is an incomplete transition into various new characteristics rather than one single blueprint, a new species, "chicken", is only identified in hindsight when the species can be obviously identified as different from its ancestral stock.

Possibly, if life originated from an ooze or protozoa of some type, at first there may only have been cellular life that used division as a reproductive method but as multicellular creatures evolved, mutation led to sexes differentiating. Division of the reproductive task into sexual roles took the form of an ovum / fertilization sequence. The egg was therefore present at the same time as the creature that gestated/laid it, speciation into birds or turtles happens much later with such a scenario.

2007-01-23 19:54:51 · answer #2 · answered by Kevin 5 · 2 1

You mumbo jumbos, the chicken came first. There is archeological evidence for this. What happened was the hen evolved from some previous animal. At first, it gave live birth, but through time and evolution, as well as natural selection and a multitude of other biology bs concepts, it eventually began laying eggs, and saw a successful spike in chicken populations. Thus the chicken came first. hands down, dont refute dont dispute. just accept the facts. WOOT! =P

2007-01-23 20:43:20 · answer #3 · answered by Phillip R 4 · 2 0

The Rooster was born first, from its rib hen was created and due to their togetherness and closeness the egg was laid by the hen.

2007-01-24 18:05:20 · answer #4 · answered by A Rauf 2 · 0 0

one egg came first, then hens are continueing with eggs

2007-01-23 21:26:34 · answer #5 · answered by Ajay B 2 · 0 0

Hen.

2007-01-23 20:45:29 · answer #6 · answered by coldblooded 2 · 0 0

the hen because it evolved from something else just like we did.

2007-01-23 20:51:32 · answer #7 · answered by cinders162002 3 · 0 0

the egg

2007-01-27 13:38:03 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Chicken.

2007-01-23 21:04:19 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

hen

2007-01-24 02:15:35 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers