![]() |
Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
![]() |
#1 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Pueblo, CO
Posts: 1,794
|
![]()
The chicken or the egg?
What I would like is the most smart-assed, yet scientific answer you can come up with. I got this idea because several years ago, during a casual radio debate on E v. C, there was a moment of mirth when a caller asked this question. The evolutionist repeated the question back and answered 'a dinosaur'. Pretty good, off the cuff, but what would you guys have said? |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: DC
Posts: 490
|
![]()
The answer lies in the definition of "egg." Presumably we are speaking of a chicken egg, because if not then obviously some form of egg came before a chicken.
So, either a chicken egg is an egg of a chicken, in which case the chicken came first, or a chicken egg is an egg containing that which will be a chicken, in which case the egg came first. On the other hand, the funniest answer I've ever seen is a cartoon of a rooster in bed smoking a cigarette and the chicken beside him saying "well I guess that answers that question" |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Pacific time zone
Posts: 686
|
![]() Quote:
However to answer the question in a more fully satisfying way, I think it's necessary to replace the word "chicken" with the words "egg-laying organism", in which case we've thrown ourselves back at least into the Paleozoic. Egg-laying reproduction accompanies sexual reproduction, so we reach the point where there's an earlier, sexual, but not egg-laying, species which gives birth, however it may have done so, to an egg-laying species. As the egg-laying species must have existed in order to lay the eggs, I conclude that the egg-laying organism came first. Replace this with "chicken" and there you go. [/bs] Edit: a paradox!! |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 10,066
|
![]()
Trace it back through evolution... let the "egg" be the separated reproductive method (egg cell and sperm, pollen and stamen, whatever it is that produces a separate individual and develops discretely from the parent organism) and let "chicken" be the initial organism which is doing the breeding... and we must conclude that the chicken came first. I believe the genereal consensus is that self-replicating dividing organism predate sexual reproduction between separate individuals.
Chicken comes first... |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 10,066
|
![]()
It even works if you're a creationist... in which case god most certainly made all those darn birds before they got around to breeding and egg-laying.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Contributor
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: (GSV) Lasting Damage
Posts: 10,734
|
![]()
the replicator.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: In a nondescript, black helicopter.
Posts: 6,637
|
![]()
A slightly different chicken-like ancestor. Repeat Ad Infintum. (Well almost)
|
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,897
|
![]()
So, where does the easter bunny fit in?
|
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,914
|
![]()
I guess the egg came before any chicken was around.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Anywhere but Colorado, including non-profits
Posts: 8,787
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|