NationStates Jolt Archive

Simple question.

It's a stupid question.

I say the Egg. the first chicken would've been a mutation of another species of bird.

It's a stupid question.

Sorry, there is no "I'm a big, fat meanie who doesn't like you" option.

I would have to say the Chicken.

It would be the egg. Physical genetic changes happen at cellular level when procreation happens. There's no realistic way a bird could go to sleep one night and wake up the next morning as a chicken.

However, that bird could lay an egg which had mutated genetic material which would hatch into a chicken. Therefore, the egg came first.

Simple question.
but not a simple answer.

but not a simple answer.
Yes, it is. Eggs existed for hundreds of millions of years before there where any chickens. Basically any animal that isn't a mammal lays eggs.

I say the Egg. the first chicken would've been a mutation of another species of bird.

What he said, more or less.

I would have to say the Chicken.

On what grounds? I've never seen anyone defend this position, so I'm curious...

Yes, it is. Eggs existed for hundreds of millions of years before there where any chickens. Basically anything that isn't a mammal nor bacterium lays eggs.
the problem is, and i curse myself for my habit of looking at both sides of the argument. there is a solid basis to say Chicken.

even tho I voted Egg, I can easily argue both sides of this issue.

This reminds me of the joke with the egg and chicken laying in bed and the chicken smoking a cigarette. Heh

the problem is, and i curse myself for my habit of looking at both sides of the argument. there is a solid basis to say Chicken.

even tho I voted Egg, I can easily argue both sides of this issue.
Out of curiosity, how can you defend the chicken came first position?

Yes, it is. Eggs existed for hundreds of millions of years before there where any chickens. Basically anything that isn't a mammal nor bacterium lays eggs.

Virusses lay eggs now?

Out of curiosity, how can you defend the chicken came first position?
simple. the egg, tho containing the genetic markings for the first chicken can still be argued to be the same species as the bird that lays it. since a mutation gene may be detected, it won't be classified as a chicken egg because no one would know what would hatch out of it (counting one's chickens before they hatch.)

after it hatches and displays charateristics of being a chicken, then it would be classified as a new species called "Chicken" but by then, it's out of the egg and a viable entity.

After that, the egg it lays would then be called a "Chicken Egg" Thus the chicken comes first.

On what grounds? I've never seen anyone defend this position, so I'm curious...

Out of curiosity, how can you defend the chicken came first position?

God

I must say the chicken as well.

Yes, it is. Eggs existed for hundreds of millions of years before there where any chickens. Basically anything that isn't a mammal nor bacterium lays eggs.

Monotremes are mammals...

Also, what about budding, regeneration, vegetative reproduction, and spores?

Virusses lay eggs now?
Viruses don't reproduce. They modify the DNA in the cells of another organism so that they produce the virus.

God

I see.
Anyone care to argue the chicken on other grounds.

I see.
Anyone care to argue the chicken on other grounds.
Post 14 (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11010350&postcount=14)

Post 14 (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11010350&postcount=14)
The question never specifies that it has to be a chicken egg, but just an egg. The egg of any species of animal would work for this question.

The classification of an animal (or bird, in this case) doesn't preclude an animal being that species.

For instance, before horses were named "horses", they still carried the same genetic makeup and characterics of the species. They are therefore considered horses, even before the name was coined.

Therefore, an egg carrying the genetic makeup of a chicken would still qualify under this rule. Whether it was classified as a chicken egg before or after it hatched really makes no difference. Once the classification is made, it is retrospectively added to the entire species, back to inception (in this case, the egg).

The question never specifies that it has to be a chicken egg, but just an egg. The egg of any species of animal would work for this question.
then where does this first Egg come from? it has to be laid, So the creature that lays that egg can be considered the first chicken. since it has to instill the genetic mutation to enable the egg to produce a chicken.

after all, the first human wasn't Homo Sapien.

The classification of an animal (or bird, in this case) doesn't preclude an animal being that species.

For instance, before horses were named "horses", they still carried the same genetic makeup and characterics of the species. They are therefore considered horses, even before the name was coined.

Therefore, an egg carrying the genetic makeup of a chicken would still qualify under this rule. Whether it was classified as a chicken egg before or after it hatched really makes no difference. Once the classification is made, it is retrospectively added to the entire species, back to inception (in this case, the egg).
but the genetic material deposited in the egg has to come from the mutations within the parents. thus they would be the first Chicken.

Viruses don't reproduce. They modify the DNA in the cells of another organism so that they produce the virus.

They still fit under the classification of "Anything" I would think.

The rooster!!!

Genetic mutations in reproductive material, as would be the case in this instance, doesn't change the basic makeup of the parent. In order for the bird to be classified a chicken, it would have to have its entire genetic makeup mutated, and would therefore carry all the characteristics we know as chickens.

Physical mutations of this sort simply do not happen in an existing creature, despite what you've seen on X-Men. Sufficient external stimuli to change an animal to that extent would invariably be lethal.

Minute changes within the reproductive material, however, do happen. In reality, the chance of a mutation within a single allele is approximately .06 in about 10,000,000 occurances. The chance of a viable mutation is approximately .00012 in 10,000,000 occurances. Viable is defined as non-lethal and reproduceable.

Post 14 (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11010350&postcount=14)

then where does this first Egg come from? it has to be laid, So the creature that lays that egg can be considered the first chicken. since it has to instill the genetic mutation to enable the egg to produce a chicken.

after all, the first human wasn't Homo Sapien.

The classification of an animal (or bird, in this case) doesn't preclude an animal being that species.

For instance, before horses were named "horses", they still carried the same genetic makeup and characterics of the species. They are therefore considered horses, even before the name was coined.

Therefore, an egg carrying the genetic makeup of a chicken would still qualify under this rule. Whether it was classified as a chicken egg before or after it hatched really makes no difference. Once the classification is made, it is retrospectively added to the entire species, back to inception (in this case, the egg).

Eggs predate anything even remotely resembling chickens. Unless you're willing to argue that any egg layer is a chicken.

Genetic mutations in reproductive material, as would be the case in this instance, doesn't change the basic makeup of the parent. In order for the bird to be classified a chicken, it would have to have its entire genetic makeup mutated, and would therefore carry all the characteristics we know as chickens.

Physical mutations of this sort simply do not happen in an existing creature, despite what you've seen on X-Men. Sufficient external stimuli to change an animal to that extent would invariably be lethal.

Minute changes within the reproductive material, however, do happen. In reality, the chance of a mutation within a single allele is approximately .06 in about 10,000,000 occurances. The chance of a viable mutation is approximately .00012 in 10,000,000 occurances. Viable is defined as non-lethal and reproduceable.and those mutations come from where?
a) external sources (through the eggshell?)
or
b) from the parent
and yes, some mutations don't show themselves untill much later in life. When a baby animal hits their form of Puberty, changes do occur within the body. such mutations can manifest itself then take the what we now consider nomal, changing of the feather colors. an example of a physical change outside of the egg. also amphibians. they not only change from water breathers to air breathers, but some can change their sex depending on social situations. examples of mutations that occure outside of the egg.

Eggs predate anything even remotely resembling chickens. Unless you're willing to argue that any egg layer is a chicken.
and that can be argued. even tho the parent may not look like a chicken, if the genetic make up is 50% similar to a chicken it can be considered a chicken.

Eggs predate anything even remotely resembling chickens. Unless you're willing to argue that any egg layer is a chicken.

That's really just hair-splitting. The question clearly implies chicken egg.

and those mutations come from where?
a) external sources (through the eggshell?)
or
b) from the parent
and yes, some mutations don't show themselves untill much later in life. When a baby animal hits their form of Puberty, changes do occur within the body. such mutations can manifest itself then take the what we now consider nomal, changing of the feather colors. an example of a physical change outside of the egg. also amphibians. they not only change from water breathers to air breathers, but some can change their sex depending on social situations. examples of mutations that occure outside of the egg.

The mutations occur on a cellular level within the reproductive material. In other words, within the ova/sperm of both or one parent(s). It can also occur within the zygote created by the union of the two batches of reproductive material.

Despite what changes happen to an animal during its life, those changes are still encoded within its genetic materials. Claiming that the change of feather color is equivalent to something changing species is entirely unscientific.

That's really just hair-splitting. The question clearly implies chicken egg.

Maybe to you that's obvious, but not to me.

And JuNii's argument that any egg layer is a chicken?

God

Such a compelling arguement. Care to back that up with scientific explanation?

Simple question.
Obviously the 'spam' before the 'quality post'.
:fluffle:

Obviously the 'spam' before the 'quality post'.
:fluffle:
:fluffle:

:fluffle:
:fluffle:

Harlesburg turns me on.

Ridiculous question...
As I mentioned it in my Holy Scriptures,,, " and He created chicken for us to have eggs to eat ".
This evidence is formal and nobody can contest the final aspect of the divine inspiration I had that evening writing such a good thing.

Yes brother the chicken was created first as just because it could be controversy and fight around this fact, yes the chicken was created first to prove The Holy Lord thought of that animal for giving us eggs to eat, Holy are the Scriptures.

Amen

The High Priest
- Father of your children -

and that can be argued. even tho the parent may not look like a chicken, if the genetic make up is 50% similar to a chicken it can be considered a chicken.
Then that parent was actually the chicken in question, who came from an egg from two parents who themselves may have only been 25% chicken each.

Harlesburg turns me on.
Which came first?
No one really knows, but Ruffy came multiple times.
:fluffle:

They both taste pretty good to me

Which came first?
No one really knows, but Ruffy came multiple times.
:fluffle:
Congrats my lover, you have poped my siging cherry.

Congrats my lover, you have poped my siging cherry.
W00T!!!
Hollah's Ruffy out loud!
RUFFY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The egg.
You just have to look at the fish eggs and the reptile eggs and you'll discover that...

There are snakes on the motherfucking plane! :eek:

I don't know the answer to this one. I don't like not knowing stuff! It makes me feel stupid. and confused. I don't like it. :(

Simple question.
Eggs can't come. Neither can chickens, so far as I know. So the question is irrelevant. I demand a "Myrth" option! :D

Eggs can't come. Neither can chickens, so far as I know. So the question is irrelevant. I demand a "Myrth" option! :D
Actually one time i was a Poultry farm and...

Actually one time i was a Poultry farm and...
TMI! TMI! Aieeeeee! [ covers ears and runs away ] :D

TMI! TMI! Aieeeeee! [ covers ears and runs away ] :D
Hmmm that should be at a Poultry farm...
I wasn't actually a Poultry farm you know.
*Visualize*

Egg. There were dinosaur eggs before chickens came into being.

And it is not hair splitting, but scientific truth.

The egg. Posi was the first to state my argument thereof.

The egg.
You just have to look at the fish eggs and the reptile eggs and you'll discover that...

There are snakes on the motherfucking plane! :eek:

DID SOMEBODY SAY SNAKES? MOTHERFUCKIN' SNAKES?

Do you define the nature of the egg as being of the creature that laid it, or the creature that hatches from it?

That could make the difference between a chicken hatching of a proto-chicken's egg, or a chicken hatching the first chicken egg after being born of a proto-chicken's egg.

The egg.

This guy did a speech at school on it. I can't explain his evidence, but it was awesome.

simple question, simple answer: there were eggs long before there were chickens. this question is only impossible if you don't believe in evolution or you are stupid. or both.

There needs to be a "stfu" option in the poll.

That's really just hair-splitting. The question clearly implies chicken egg.

You infer that, but it is not implied.

I don't know the answer to this one. I don't like not knowing stuff! It makes me feel stupid. and confused. I don't like it. :(
The answer is neither.

The rooster came first or there would be no hens a laying.

The answer is neither.

The rooster came first or there would be no hens a laying.
Wrong.

God came first.

Ever notice? This is a leftist-dominated forum and the poll is clearly showing a majority in "egg." This just goes to show how it's all a leftist plot against God.

The egg. Of course it was a dinosaur egg, but you never qualifed the egg.

Of course if you really meant a theatre in Albany New York (http://www.theegg.org/), then it's the chicken.

The construction of The Egg began in 1966 and was completed twelve years later in 1978. The Egg was designed by Wallace Harrison for all the people of New York State and to accommodate many events and performances.

Architecturally, The Egg is without precedent. From a distance it seems as much a sculpture as a building. Though it appears to sit on the main platform, the stem that holds The Egg actually goes down through six stories deep into the Earth. The Egg keeps its shape by wearing a girdle - a heavily reinforced concrete beam that was poured along with the rest of the shell. This beam helps transmit The Egg's weight onto the supporting pedestal and gives the structure an ageless durability that belies its nickname.

The correct answer is, "no."

Chicken.

Why?

I'm a creationist.

Egg. At some point there was your first chicken, having hatched from the first chicken egg, laid by the last pre-chickens. Well, not necessarily the last, but you know what I mean.