Home > Science Group > Discussion Board

 Which came first the chicken or the egg?

This debate has appeared in the discussion section recently.  Search for it, and you'll see why you haven't gotten much of a response here.

Here is a link for you to a past discussion.

Neither.  Whatever ancestor to both chicken and egg that existed replicated asexually, resembling neither what we would consider to be a chicken nor an egg. When this organism started to replicate sexually, something that eventually became chickens and something that eventually became eggs came into being.  Eggs and chickens are simultaneous developments.

Before chicken to be chicken, it had to be an egg!

A chicken is a bird. Birds are generally thought to have evolved from small dinosaurs in the mid-late Jurassic, over 150 million years ago. However, the domestic chicken is not an 'early bird' at all and evolved much more recently, probably in the last 500,000 years.

The hard-shelled egg evolved much earlier than birds as part of the conquest of the land by our previously-water-based ancestors. Basically, an egg is a protected little pool of 'sea water' which allows water-evolved animals to reproduce in dry environments. The first group of animals that laid hard-shelled eggs were the amniotes and the earliest known hard-shelled egg is about 340 million years old.

So, the answer to your question is that the EGG is much much older than the CHICKEN. The egg is an old and essential part of understanding life on Earth. The chicken is a rather dim and unimportant bird that tastes nice to the ape Homo Sapiens.  

well, if you think about it, when god created human, adam and eve were made alive, and breathing.

so then don't you think that the chicken would be born alive and breathing?

sorry if you don't believe in god, or whatever, but its true(:

In reply 7: The story of The Garden of Eden fails to correspond to the natural world. There isn't any evidence to back up the first chapter of the Bible. But the vast amount of information contained in DNA and fossils makes it a simple matter of arranging all the animals (both alive and extinct) in order that they evolved.

In your ID photo you are holding up a cute little hairless primate, a human being, a member of a species of bipedal primates in the family Hominidae (Homo sapiens: "wise human"). DNAevidence indicates that humans evolved in Africa about 200,000 years ago. (His or)Her DNA is as genetically close to a chimpanzee as a tiger's DNA is to a lion's. She is a member of the class mammilia. So, unlike a chicken, she didn't incubate in an egg because mammals incubate inside the female abdomen. The mammals seized the opportunity created by the mass extinction of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. Before 65m years ago the fossil record shows that mammals were very small and nocturnal (they were warm blooded and could live at night, dinosaurs were cold and couldn't). Dinosaurs ruled for hundreds of millions of years. Their fossil bones and the age of rocks and the analysis of DNA all link to make unshakeable proof of evolution. 

You and your baby are part of the truly miraculous, massive story of evolution. I would be much more amazed with the God who created evolution than the God who created the little nursery story of Genesis.

In my above post I said that mammals don't incubate in eggs. Whoops. There is of course one weird little critter that does... The Duck-billed Platypus, a very very strange 'missing link' creature from Australia. It is a half-evolved mammal, half-way between the reptiles and the mammals. It has fur and is warm blooded, but it lays eggs. It's DNA tells us it evolved at exactly the moment the earliest mammal fossils start appearing. The Duck-Billed Platypus and hundreds of other connecting species make evolution impossible to contradict. The theory repeatedly fits the evidence and the evidence repeatedly fits the theory.

In reply to #7:

I totally agree!