TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- What came first, the chicken or the egg?


Posted by Krypton on Dec-13-2007 05:39:

Dunno What came first, the chicken or the egg?


Posted by donnybrasco on Dec-13-2007 05:41:

I came first...because I'm a guy, and that's what we do.



So all things being equal; The guy chicken obviously came first...and the lady chicken finished herself off with an egg-beater.......get it? Egg-"beater"?

Damn, I'm good.


Posted by Moral Hazard on Dec-13-2007 12:51:

You need to further define your terms.
If by egg you mean egg in general or any type of egg then without question egg came first as there were many aquatic species that produced eggs millions of years priort to the evolution of the chicken.
If by egg you mean specifically a Chicken Egg then the chicken came first. An egg is catagorized by what produced the egg, rather than what the egg produced. This is why the eggs we generally purchase are classified as chicken/emu/duck even though they are normally unfertalized and have no potential to produce any life. Given that an egg is named for what produced the egg then a chicken egg could not exist until such time as the first chicken laid it's first egg. Since the existance of a chicken egg is impossible without the prior existance of a chicken then clearly the chicken came first.


Posted by George Smiley on Dec-13-2007 15:01:

The egg, obviously


Posted by Capitalizt on Dec-13-2007 15:55:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/05/26/chicken.egg/


Posted by George Smiley on Dec-13-2007 16:18:

quote:
Originally posted by Capitalizt
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/05/26/chicken.egg/

Of course. What we know as chickens today must have evolved from something. When an animal evolves, it means that it has been born with some kind of mutation that its parents did not have. Therefore, when chickens were evolving, an egg must have been laid with some kind of mutation in it, and therefore, the egg was not the same animal, genetically, as its parents. Yet the eggs that the mutant chicken lays will be the same


Posted by DJ Shibby on Dec-13-2007 18:48:

I would imagine that something programmed all of this craziness to be nothing but new all the time.

An algorithm that constantly pumps out ridiculous and awesome dynamic newness.

Change.

The Change Cycle. The Life Conundrum. The WTF=42 Quantum Equation.

I just took a huge hit. Rock on.

The funniest part is that the only thing that we actually know to be true is that we experience whatever it is we experience the way we experience it.

And even that breaks down with the slightest touch of random arrays of carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, and other goodies that might not be real at all, but sure kick a hell of a punch in the punch at the company christmas party. Whoo!!


Posted by Krypton on Dec-13-2007 21:35:

quote:
Originally posted by Capitalizt
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/05/26/chicken.egg/


That article actually made me start this thread..

So where did the first chicken egg come from if there were no chickens?


Posted by Lira on Dec-13-2007 22:01:

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
That article actually made me start this thread..

So where did the first chicken egg come from if there were no chickens?

Don't let the semantics confuse you.

A long time ago, speakers of a language older than English saw some funny looking birds, and they realised they needed to talk about these birds. They then coined the word (the older form I know of the word chicken is something like "kiukinam", from Old Germanic) and - ca-ta-pow! - chickens were born. However, if you want to know what the first prototypical chicken was like (i.e. the first bird you'd recognise as being a chicken)... well, there has never been one. Chickens slowly evolved, just like everything else, and as long as it resembles what we'd consider a chicken, it is a chicken (and this boundary is highly subjective).

However, I'm required by the state of Kansas to give you an alternative view: God said "Let there be funny birds", and the first chicken was created


Posted by Krypton on Dec-13-2007 22:38:

My ultimate questions...

When was the first cell split?
When was the first egg ever laid?
When was the first mammalian birth?
When did the first piece of an animal like a starfish spring forth an identical specimen?

Add a what, who, how, and why to those questions too..


Posted by George Smiley on Dec-13-2007 23:21:

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
That article actually made me start this thread..

So where did the first chicken egg come from if there were no chickens?

A turkey that fucked a sparrow


Posted by DJ Shibby on Dec-14-2007 01:02:

How about this one?

Because an egg is nothing more than a giant single celled organism, it would have been around much longer than the chicken, since single celled organisms were the first lifeforms on the planet, and the chicken sadly only came along later.

Then again, the chicken is made up of many different types of cells, each of which is its own organism.

So I'd have to conclude that they're the same thing, so differentiation is futile.


Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Dec-14-2007 01:51:

quote:
Originally posted by George Smiley
Of course. What we know as chickens today must have evolved from something. When an animal evolves, it means that it has been born with some kind of mutation that its parents did not have. Therefore, when chickens were evolving, an egg must have been laid with some kind of mutation in it, and therefore, the egg was not the same animal, genetically, as its parents. Yet the eggs that the mutant chicken lays will be the same


yeah, there was recent (like in the last 18 months) discussion and there seemed to be a general consensus that the egg came first.


Posted by Fir3start3r on Dec-14-2007 06:11:

The test tube?


Posted by Renegade on Dec-16-2007 03:02:

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
That article actually made me start this thread..

So where did the first chicken egg come from if there were no chickens?


Pick a hen at random, then put it next to her mother, put the mother next to her mother and so on until you have several million consecutive chicken generations lined up. If you were to walk down that line, you would not be able to point to a definitive spot in the series where all birds after that spot are chickens and all birds before it aren't - the changes from generation to generation are far too small to allow that. The rate of genetic change between a hen and her chick are probably hundreds of times greater, on average, than the genetic changes that are actually preserved (i.e. positively selected) over time in the active germ-line. We can talk apprehensibly about "genetic trees" or "common ancestors" in the context of phylogeny, but to talk about "species" - particularly in the fixed sense that we usually use the word - makes no sense.

What we could do, however, is walk down that line of chickens and identify the most recent bird to be related to every surviving chicken on the planet. For humans, this "Eve" probably lived about 60,000-100,000 years ago, but for chickens - given the shorter generational spans and the higher birth rates - this chicken "Eve" probably lived much more recently. If we say that this chicken - from which all other chickens are decended - marks the point at which chickens first came into existence (which wouldn't make a great deal of sense because as chicken generations go by that point will keep on moving further and further forward - but we'll ignore that for now) then we can say confidently that "the egg" came first, as that chicken was undoubtedly hatched from an egg.

It all makes sense when you think about it: what is a chicken, after all, if not simply the disposable vessel an egg uses to produce more eggs?


Posted by Omega_M on Dec-16-2007 04:21:

What came first, the chicken or the egg?

Let me go get a quarter. We can settle this over a coin flip.


Posted by Krypton on Dec-16-2007 04:48:

quote:
Originally posted by Renegade
Pick a hen at random, then put it next to her mother, put the mother next to her mother and so on until you have several million consecutive chicken generations lined up. If you were to walk down that line, you would not be able to point to a definitive spot in the series where all birds after that spot are chickens and all birds before it aren't - the changes from generation to generation are far too small to allow that. The rate of genetic change between a hen and her chick are probably hundreds of times greater, on average, than the genetic changes that are actually preserved (i.e. positively selected) over time in the active germ-line. We can talk apprehensibly about "genetic trees" or "common ancestors" in the context of phylogeny, but to talk about "species" - particularly in the fixed sense that we usually use the word - makes no sense.

What we could do, however, is walk down that line of chickens and identify the most recent bird to be related to every surviving chicken on the planet. For humans, this "Eve" probably lived about 60,000-100,000 years ago, but for chickens - given the shorter generational spans and the higher birth rates - this chicken "Eve" probably lived much more recently. If we say that this chicken - from which all other chickens are decended - marks the point at which chickens first came into existence (which wouldn't make a great deal of sense because as chicken generations go by that point will keep on moving further and further forward - but we'll ignore that for now) then we can say confidently that "the egg" came first, as that chicken was undoubtedly hatched from an egg.

It all makes sense when you think about it: what is a chicken, after all, if not simply the disposable vessel an egg uses to produce more eggs?


good answer..


Posted by mezzir on Dec-16-2007 09:34:

quote:
Originally posted by Moral Hazard
You need to further define your terms.
If by egg you mean egg in general or any type of egg then without question egg came first as there were many aquatic species that produced eggs millions of years priort to the evolution of the chicken.
If by egg you mean specifically a Chicken Egg then the chicken came first. An egg is catagorized by what produced the egg, rather than what the egg produced. This is why the eggs we generally purchase are classified as chicken/emu/duck even though they are normally unfertalized and have no potential to produce any life. Given that an egg is named for what produced the egg then a chicken egg could not exist until such time as the first chicken laid it's first egg. Since the existance of a chicken egg is impossible without the prior existance of a chicken then clearly the chicken came first.

God damnit. Way back in grade school I came to the conclusion that the egg came first, and up until this no one had threatened that point of view at all. Very good point man, I gotta stop and think about this now



Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.