Its the age old question of which came first, the chicken or the egg. Philisophically challenging in every way because there will never be an answer. My opinion is that the egg came first, possibly because evolution changed the being before the known chicken into a modern day chicken, thus making the egg come first. I would be interested in reading your opinions on the question. And rather than just answering chicken or egg, give some reasoning along with your answers.
A chicken and an egg are lying in bed. The chicken is smoking a cigarette
with a satisfied smile on its face and the egg is frowning and looking put
out. The egg mutters to no one in particular “I guess we answered THAT
question.”
… obviously, my vote goes to the chicken.
The egg.
As you said, somewhere along the evolutionary ladder a non-chicken laid a chicken egg.
Unless you’re a radical fundie. Then the chicken came first because God made chickens in his own image, or something like that.
Bad Rysdad! No ladder! Tree!
Anyway, yes, the egg came loooong before a chicken ever appeared. The amniotic egg was critical for vertebrates to successfully move out of the oceans and onto dry land. The amniotes (all critters with an amniotic egg) consist of all non-“fish”, non-amphibian vertebrates (or, to put it another way, all terrestrial vertberates).
Said egg has been around since about the middle of the Pennsylvanian period (~300 million years ago).
Look, eyedea, I don’t like discouraging anyone from asking questions, but your string of recent not-exactly-mind-expanding queries is not going over well.
Let’s see how much knowledge you really have
O’clock where does it come from?
The Straight Dope is full of live, interesting people. Don’t ask questions which could be easily answered by going to google or silly hypothetical questions with no real answer.
Take some time to just lurk around here before you post. You’ll get a lot more respect if your earn your right to post questions by doing your homework first.
This all seems pretty mundane. And pointless.
But, I’m willing to take the somewhat unpopular stance that the chicken came before the egg. I think implicit in the question is that we’re asking whether the chicken came before the chicken egg, otherwise, as Darwin points out, it’s not too interesting.
What’s a “chicken egg”? Rysdad erroneously concludes that its an egg from which a chicken will hatch. The accepted usage indicates otherwise. I have some “chicken eggs” in my refrigerator. The grocery store sells “chicken eggs”. No, clearly a chicken egg is one laid by a chicken. Ergo, the chicken must have come before the first chicken egg.
Sloppy reasoning like that make me sick. A non-chicken laid a non-chicken egg. A chicken laid a chicken egg. QED.
What about those radical anti-theists who irrationally conclude that just because they’ve never seen a non-chicken egg hatch into a chicken that it couldn’t have been that way? Science can’t really tell us anything about origins anyway.
(kgmm)/(s*s)
I just checked in my dictionary and “chicken” comes first. It’s on page 355 and “egg” is on page 541. 
An egg is a presumptuous chicken. The real comes before the presumptuous, thus, the chicken came first.
Whatever the ancestor of the chicken was, one day one of them laid an egg. It was an egg of their sort, not a chicken egg. However, due to a mutation of some sort, the organism that had developed in that egg was not one of them. Rather, it was a chicken, which, in time, might go on to lay an egg, which would be ther first chicken egg. Chickens lay chicken eggs, and all but the first came from chicken eggs.
Well, if you want to get all philosophical about it:
The issue of whether chicken eggs or chickens themselves arrived first on the scene is not what one could call clear-cut. Most forms of domestic chicken, Gallus domesticus, were derived from the Red Jungle Fowl, Gallus bankiva. So, at what point during the domestication process did G. bankiva give rise to G. domesticus? The “correct” answer is “at some arbitrary point.” Species represent a continuum, and the process of speciation is a gradual one: one species does not instantly give rise to another. So, between G. bankiva and G. domesticus, we have numerous intermediates. We can look at a modern chicken and say, yeah, it’s different enough from the Jungle Fowl to be considered a different species, but during the actual process of producing the chicken, such a distinction can only be made arbitrarily. So, it is likewise completely arbitrary to decide whether the chicken or the chicken egg came first.
One could argue that it is the egg which determines the animal which eventually hatches; therefore, the egg must have come before, since a chicken can only come from a chicken egg.
One could also argue that the animal which lays the egg determines what is in the egg; therefore, the chicken came first, since a chicken can only lay a chicken egg.
Ultimately, it’s an unanswerable question, since we can’t pinpoint exactly when in the process of domestication, and during which of the numerous matings involved, the first “true chicken” was produced.
And yes, I am bored
For the egg to come first, it would have to have been mutated from some other similar bird. So wouldn’t 2 of them had to have been mutated? One for the chicken and one for the rooster?
Umm, shouldn’t this be in Great Debates, or maybe MPSIMS? Surely not General Questions.
Actually, Comments on Cecil’s Columns . Go figure.
eyedea, this is twice that I’ve informed you that this forum is not for every stupid question you have after a few too many beers. Please exercise a lot more judgement when selecting a question for this forum.
Thank you.
dude, dont be an asshole. you know how old i am… 13
dude, dont be an asshole. Im 13, I think u could cut me a little slack. You have been a member one month longer than me. dont think your all high and mighty.
Dude. Call someone an asshole again in this forum and you will be 13 and a former member of this message board.
This board is primarily for adults. We don’t disallow children beginning at age 13, but in your case it might be better to be a listener rather than a talker for a bit.
If you have any problems with how this board is moderated, you will bring them up in the BBQ Pit forum, not here. That’s our rule.
I’m going to take a chance and try to solve this old chesnut rationally.
Got it!
The rooster came first. As far as I know, chickens don’t come.
What chicken and what egg?
If nobody is there to see it, is it a chicken?
BOK BOK!
This is typical misogynist propaganda, and serves only to reduce the role of the female in society to the status of a reproducing machine.
I notice that the question always refers to whether the chicken or egg came first; the cockerel is never brought into the question, despite his equal responsibility for any fertilised eggs. This serves only to reinforce the penis-centric point of view that it is only the female who is to blame for any unwanted eggs.
A better way to phrase the question would be:
“Which came first:
[ul][li]the naïve chicken who was coerced into substandard sex by a chicken-hating, savage, irresponsible cockerel, resulting in the chicken being locked into a lifetime of servitude to the lazy layabout cockerel in a dank, smelly coop, waiting day and night on the baby chicks, whilst being forced to conform to cockerels’ artificial standards of “beauty” by undertaking painful make-up rituals (which further symbolise the chains in which females are held to the penis), never to discover the liberated joy of unclipped feathers, and eventually persuaded that she “enjoys” incubating the eggs whilst scratching at dust, not noticing that this is just a ploy to keep her in the coop; [/li][li]or the egg?”[/ul][/li]
Right on!
Assuming Evolution.
Going all the way back to the roots of ‘life’ you’ll end up with complex chemicals(amino acids/DNA/RNA) that replicate themselves, sometimes with variation. So I guess “chicken/egg” came abt together as complex chemicals.
In another theory, even these complex chemicals have an ancestor…Crytals that replicate themselves.