I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  





rss

friendsmore friends | add your site
Asylum

Holy Taco

Funny Videos

BuzzFeed

NothingToxic

Oddee

Mousebreaker

Online Games

Eat Liver

Online Games

Gorilla Mask

Full Downloads

Norway Games

Damn Cool Pics

Kontraband

Extreme Humor

X Hollywood

I Dont Like You

123 Games

Hollywoodtuna

Funny Games

Cool Stuff

Viva La Games

X - Vids

Smit Happens

Funny Videos

Funny Stuff

ebaumsworld



Back to Listing

Which Came First: The Chicken Or The Egg?

Hits: 9279 | Rating: (2.5) | Category: Science | Added by: PixelMitch
Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
foursixty3
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 30 Posts
Friday, January 25, 2013 7:04:07 PM
actuality preceeds potentiality, therefore, chicken

razbitom
Male, 40-49, Australia
 831 Posts
Friday, January 25, 2013 5:16:12 PM
the rooster.
then he rolled over and fell asleep.

honkeylips
Male, 30-39, Midwest US
 1570 Posts
Friday, January 25, 2013 2:05:42 PM
I just had this talk with my kids at school and this was pretty much the exact spiel I gave to them.

EgalM
Male, 30-39, Canada
 1710 Posts
Friday, January 25, 2013 9:17:24 AM
Religion=Chicken
Evolution=Egg

I think that's the reason it's such a puzzler.

pompousass7
Male, 40-49, Canada
 261 Posts
Friday, January 25, 2013 8:56:43 AM
don't need to watch to know the right answer..the egg came first
what came first? the mule or horse and donkey?
what came first? the labradoodle or the lab and poodle?

TuckFarted
Female, 18-29, Europe
 87 Posts
Friday, January 25, 2013 7:50:42 AM
Derp it's the chicken, it evolved to lay eggs..DONE.
There saved you 3 minutes.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5708 Posts
Friday, January 25, 2013 5:44:42 AM
that doesn't make sense at all, that would result in the chicken ending after initial mutation (it couldn't reproduce to make more chickens if its the only chicken).

Not necessarily. Since evolution is a slow process, it stands to reason that the first true chicken could reproduce with proto-chickens. The only difference would be the trait that confers a competitive advantage to the new chicken, which I would presume to either be a dominant trait, or it would grant such a large advantage such that the strict proto-chicken/proto-chicken offspring would be outcompeted by the new chicken/proto-chicken offspring.

SpermNinja81
Male, 30-39, Australia
 458 Posts
Friday, January 25, 2013 12:36:01 AM
Jesus laid it. argument over.

AvatarJohn
Male, 30-39, Southern US
 999 Posts
Thursday, January 24, 2013 8:43:03 PM
Cecil Adams answered this about 29 years ago and came to the same conclusion: Straight Dope

Of course, I like his more humorous answer: "The chicken came first because (sigh) the chicken had to get laid before the egg could."

darkmagic14n
Male, 18-29, Western US
 1633 Posts
Thursday, January 24, 2013 4:42:33 PM
[quote">The protochicken would have to have a non-chicken feature that wouldn't allow it to breed and produce fertile offspring with the chicken. [/quote">

that doesn't make sense at all, that would result in the chicken ending after initial mutation (it couldn't reproduce to make more chickens if its the only chicken).

if you want to believe in evolution, homo sapiens didn't just reproduce with each other.

patchouly
Male, 40-49, Canada
 4568 Posts
Thursday, January 24, 2013 4:32:25 PM
@UDUMASS I was going to respond, but skullgrin covered it nicely. To be fair, I did mention that in my original post. ("Probably similar to reptile eggs").

darkmagic14n
Male, 18-29, Western US
 1633 Posts
Thursday, January 24, 2013 4:32:05 PM
except, you know, God placed the chicken on this earth, and thus the chicken never hatched from an egg.

ledgehead
Male, 40-49, Canada
 595 Posts
Thursday, January 24, 2013 3:59:19 PM
its like Schrodinger's cat, not until the box (egg) is opened do we know if the cat is dead (or it hatched a chicken).

skullgrin
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 915 Posts
Thursday, January 24, 2013 3:45:48 PM
"So explain to me how the creature in the egg would have survived without the hard shell long enough (millions of years supposedly?) to actually develop the hard shell. Think before you go spouting off trying to sound smart."

you're that stupid huh?

i guess you dont know about the animals that lay eggs that don't have hard shells (frogs, fish, etc)

Gerry1of1
Male, 50-59, Western US
 33910 Posts
Thursday, January 24, 2013 3:07:01 PM

Which came first?

The rooster.

UDUMASS
Male, 30-39, Canada
 61 Posts
Thursday, January 24, 2013 2:56:08 PM
"The egg is more than likely an evolutionary variation on the amniotic sac. At some point, the amniotic sac was able to be expelled to continue growing, outside of the body (probably similar to reptile eggs). Eventually, the "egg" developed a hard shell to ensure the safety of the embryo.
Or...you can let your eyes roll back into your head, fail to question things and just say that God must have put Chickens on the planet. Whichever works best for you."

...So explain to me how the creature in the egg would have survived without the hard shell long enough (millions of years supposedly?) to actually develop the hard shell. Think before you go spouting off trying to sound smart.

beternal
Male, 18-29, Europe
 2327 Posts
Thursday, January 24, 2013 1:40:22 PM
@patchouly - very true :) - so again, backing the 'chicken came first' hypothesis.

...So bacteria (whole/ 'adult' organisms) came first... and they reproduce via binary fission (akin to mitosis which I mentioned earlier), so in effect, the chicken gave rise directly to another chicken. BUT, bacteria can also conjugate which is to use an analogy, a form of sexual reproduction... however, the 'offspring' is the bacteria itself as it has now acquired the new genetic information and incorporated it into itself. So although technically you could say there was sexual reproduction (a prelude to an offspring = a potential 'egg') - so if conjugation preceded fission, you could argue the 'egg' came first.

But to add a twist to it - as the bacterium is the parents and the offspring at the same time, you could argue that neither came first and they are both co-existing at the same time in some sort of quantum-fluxy thing...

beternal
Male, 18-29, Europe
 2327 Posts
Thursday, January 24, 2013 1:29:23 PM
So a proto-chicken lays true-eggs that could either hatch another proto-chicken or a true-chicken = egg came first...

OR - proto-egg hatches out a true-chicken or a proto-chicken = chicken came first...

The question is naturally what is defined as a true egg vs. a true chicken.

To me an egg would be a 'birthing chamber produced from a fusion of gametes' which would suggest some sort of sexual reproduction. However, sexual reproduction came after mitosis... and therefore 'whole-life forms' came before 'egged' life forms and therefore you could argue the chicken came before the egg (if we are using the whole life form vs. immature-birthed life form as the true definition of a chicken and an egg).

patchouly
Male, 40-49, Canada
 4568 Posts
Thursday, January 24, 2013 1:17:37 PM
The egg is more than likely an evolutionary variation on the amniotic sac. At some point, the amniotic sac was able to be expelled to continue growing, outside of the body (probably similar to reptile eggs). Eventually, the "egg" developed a hard shell to ensure the safety of the embryo.

Or...you can let your eyes roll back into your head, fail to question things and just say that God must have put Chickens on the planet. Whichever works best for you.

McGovern1981
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 13291 Posts
Thursday, January 24, 2013 12:56:31 PM
Meh now I want some scrambled chicken fetuses.

Skett
Male, 18-29, Europe
 21 Posts
Thursday, January 24, 2013 12:37:04 PM
Well it always was obvious. Its not a chicken if its not born from an egg...

tatripp
Male, 18-29, Western US
 1201 Posts
Thursday, January 24, 2013 12:34:34 PM
THat doesn't even make sense. If a species cannot be formed from one birth between a species, then how can the chicken come at all?
The protochicken would have to have a non-chicken feature that wouldn't allow it to breed and produce fertile offspring with the chicken.
Was the protochicken born from an egg?
The point of "what came first: the chicken or the egg?" is to talk about the origin of life. Could life have been created without being born. How could something come into existence that is designed to breed and give birth if nothing gave birth to it?

chicagojay
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 1870 Posts
Thursday, January 24, 2013 12:33:26 PM
Only a ron of the more would ever ask this. How about, "Which came first, the baby human or the adult human?" The same question can be asked of any being that gives birth, FOOL!

PixelMitch
Male, 18-29, Canada
 1 Posts
Thursday, January 24, 2013 12:12:27 PM
Link: Which Came First: The Chicken Or The Egg? [Rate Link] - The age old question finally has an answer!


You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account
 

Back to Listing ^top


Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |
© 2014 Demand Media, Inc. All rights reserved.