the chicken or the egg?
2007-06-21 04:41:17 · 34 answers · asked by rikiconners 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
The chicken would have had to evolved from something else in order to have the ability to lay eggs. Therefore, the chicken would have been first... That's stemming back from the prehistoric times when the DINOSAURS first started laying eggs as reptiles and then (as I said) evolved into other life forms over millions of years. Why even ask this age old question? Who came up with this question in the first place!? It boggles the mind...
2007-06-21 04:50:55 · answer #1 · answered by devon 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
While it does seem puzzling at first, the answer is simple. It was neither. Prior to the current chicken laying an egg was of reality, there was the 'proto-chicken.' Paleotologists call it the Archaeopteryx.
In layman's terms, this proto-chicken laid an egg with a mutation, and the interior change of the DNA was enough that the exterior of the new bird could be thought of as a new species.
2007-06-21 09:43:13 · answer #2 · answered by Its not me Its u 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This Question is the chicken from the egg and the egg from the chicken, all that good for eating.
2007-06-21 06:01:53 · answer #3 · answered by roberth m 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The egg is the delivery mechanism and the chicken is the end result. Many creatures both past and present produce eggs in reproduction. The ancestor of the modern chicken produced a genetic variant that we call a chicken.
2007-06-21 05:14:12 · answer #4 · answered by ycats 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A chicken and an egg are lying in bed. The chicken is sitting up against the headboard smoking a cigarette with a very satisfied smile on its face. The egg looking a bit pissed off, grabs the sheet, rolls over, and says "Well, I guess we finally answered THAT question."
2007-06-21 04:46:18 · answer #5 · answered by Optimistic 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Look at it from a logical and scientific point of view. The chicken was created, then laid the first egg. Everything had a first, and it couldn't be an egg, because nothing could have laid it, plus nothing could have taken care of neither the egg or the chick. So the chicken must have been "created", then laid the first egg. It's both logic and science.
2007-06-21 04:46:44 · answer #6 · answered by ICYCUBE 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Most Darwin-following people (evolutionists?) say the egg, creationists say the chicken. Well, it takes a chicken to lay an egg, right? But it takes an egg to hatch into a chicken. But anyway, here is what I think--
WHAT DEFINES A CHICKEN?? Chickens are evolving as we speak. To me, it kind of boils down to that.
2007-06-21 04:46:38 · answer #7 · answered by Insert nickname here 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Neither- if the chicken came first then there had to have been some roosters hanging out to fertilize the egg. If the egg came first then who was nurturing the baby chick to grow up healthy and strong?
2007-06-21 04:44:32 · answer #8 · answered by dpileofashes 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Chicken!
Just like all other animals able to breed and lay eggs or give birth. The animal came first with the ability to re-produce.
2007-06-21 04:44:38 · answer #9 · answered by teresacmt 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Chicken evolved to lay the egg
2007-06-21 04:43:25 · answer #10 · answered by hotmom_e 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋