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

Please explain your answer.

2007-01-29 18:30:07 · 9 answers · asked by ☢☠☣☢☠☣ 3 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

First off, I need some more support for your answers than a few thousand year-old wacked- up history book(The Bible or what ever you bookyou worship).

Second, when I say "chicken egg" i mean a egg actually identical to any modern chicken egg.

2007-01-29 18:51:32 · update #1

9 answers

The chicken of course (because the egg comes from the chicken)

2007-01-29 18:36:55 · answer #1 · answered by flower_from_the_heavens 4 · 1 1

I say it was the egg. The "first chicken" (the first member of the species we call chicken, having whatever characteristics distinguish a chicken from its ancestor species) was likely to be the result of recombination of the genes of two ancestral near-chickens, or some kind of mutant (this depends on how we define the difference between a chicken and a chicken-ancestor) that made it a "chicken." It hatched from an egg that must have been a chicken egg, that was laid by a non-chicken. It mated with a non-chicken and laid another chicken egg. Something like that - but if the chicken came first, then you would have to have a chicken hatching from a non-chicken egg somewhere, which is categorically not possible. blah blah blah! It's purely a question of defining terms a certain way, not a real puzzle.

2007-01-29 19:15:12 · answer #2 · answered by zilmag 7 · 0 0

A. Enough with the Creationist B.S.

B. To answer the question, it is a difficult process of biological identification and even semantics. If a pre-chicken laid an egg that became the first chicken, one would be inclined to say the chicken came first. However, since a chicken hatched from that egg, would it technically be a chicken egg? I would think that an egg is defined by what comes from it, thereby the first true chicken would have to have come from the first chicken egg.

2007-01-29 18:49:06 · answer #3 · answered by Link 2 · 0 3

My answer would be the chicken first. Because if egg comes first it would not hatch,since no chickens are gonna lay it. Also, you need a chicken to get an egg.

2007-01-29 18:37:32 · answer #4 · answered by FloralLover 6 · 0 1

The chicken came first. The chicken egg can't lay an egg.

2007-01-29 18:33:25 · answer #5 · answered by Agent319.007 6 · 0 1

Chicken egg. Even though humans arent hatched, babies start as the female egg before they are fertilized with a sperm. The chicken embreyo is contained inside the egg.

but seriously.. who knows? we might as well say which came first.. dinosaurs or dinosaur eggs?

2007-01-30 12:43:26 · answer #6 · answered by Sore wa himitsu desu! 3 · 0 0

The Bible says Adam named all the animals so I believe the chicken came 1st.

2007-01-29 18:34:10 · answer #7 · answered by Kelly M 3 · 1 1

You know that's an age old QUESTION? ITS the chicken. G-d created the animals. HE never mentioned the egg.

2007-01-29 18:41:45 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

That would depend on whether you are a creationist or an evolutionist, as a creationist I believe the chicken was first. God said let there be chicken, and there they were, and if cooked right they are GOOD!!!

2007-01-29 18:41:56 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers