off the bat i would have said EGG right away, since its pretty obvious that a regular chicken would've have hatched from an egg that was laid by a pre-evolved (not sure if that's the right term) chicken. but since the TS states that we should consider the term chicken as any creature that lays an egg then id have to say CHICKEN.. Why? assuming the theory is correct, then I can conclude that through progressive assembly a certain creature was formed without any form of conception, and through time and adaptation was able to lay eggs. Spoiler I based my answer here
Yes, this is the most likely case. Of course, it wouldn't just be a fully fledged chicken that pieced itself together out of random molecules, it'd be more like a very very basic creature is created that, over time, evolved. Since evolution continues after the species begins laying eggs and the "chicken" analogy was obviously in refference to a "modern" egg laying species, it would still be the egg that came first.
That seems quite correct. But it would have to have evolved over a massive amount of time, from whatever it was originally - most likely a fish-frog-thing.
I have to agree, because if you look at embryo's, we've still got remnants of being fish. Seeing as the earth was covered in volcanoes, life had to start in the sea or else we'd have been killed whenever the volcanoes erupted.
But if life started in the sea, what do you suppose happened during the periods when there were ice ages? Ice ages before land organisms, etc.
ii think .. the .. err .. eg .. CHICKEN ! .. came first ! It proberly just .. appeared out of no where on Earth .. so magical ;DD ii will show you what happened : Ted : .. OMG FRED FRED .. look at the lamp Fred !! .. a feathery lil things on it !! Fred : .. OMG TED !! BE A VERRAYY CAREFUL !! Chicken : .. BUCK BUCK BUCK BUCKOOO ! Both Ted && Fred : .. AHH !! .. it's a wooslingiidabiilingg ! Chicken : .. Actually .. you can call meh Chicken ;DD
Regarding it in terms of evolution: Organisms can't just suddenly wake up and think, "Maybe I should have kids by squeezing a fatass egg out, then sitting on it for a while!" They have to have had an existing trait modified by natural selection. Sure, you could take something basic and make it much more badass, but it had to have had a preexisting trait/gene that had some sort of mutation (mutation rates are very low in non-viral organisms, so it's not possible to have the next generation become something that has no similar/ancestral traits). All of the mutations in all of the offspring would then be selected against by some force, and those genes would be passed on. The amount of evolution to go from a dividing form of reproduction to an egg laying is massive, so the number of mutations necessary couldn't have occurred. Meaning that there would have had to have been the chicken's ancestors even before they laid their first egg. The egg comes first if you think of it in the perspective of a particular chicken, but the chicken is first if you consider the actual character of egg-laying.
And why wouldn't you take it in the perspective of a particular chicken, and instead the actual charachter of egg-laying. What the question is is if the chicken came first <_<
I'm uncertain of what it is you're trying to say here. If you're saying that we consider the first living organism in the chicken's evolutionary path to lay an egg to be a chicken then you're quite right, the chicken did come first. However, we can't consider that to be true, because as any student of ornithology will tell you, modern chickens and birds evolved from particular dinosaurs, such as those of the raptor family, which also laid eggs. From the perspective of an evolutionary scale, it is impossible for a modern chicken to come before a modern egg, as the eggs must first be laid by a precursor to the chicken in order to hatch into the modern chicken.
http://tshirtgroove.com/wp-content/uplo ... tshirt.jpg ^And that is all you need to know to fully understand my beliefs on this subject, and a few other only slightly relevant subjects.
Personally, I think that there would have had to been more than one chicken or egg at first, no? Because without a mate, the chicken/egg could not reproduce and then BAM no more chickens for pollo parmigiana or eggs for uovas en purgatorio.
Well...ofcourse...examples of this nature are given in singular form for the sake of simplicity. No one is suggesting a precursor species to the modern chicken fertilised itself and laid eggs.
It's hard to say which...so i believ that an egg did only b.c every animal started to turn into something different between ice age and all that..so something could of had an egg and this diformed apperance wasnt that exact animal xD idk just a though
I think the chicken did.... i think it probably evolved from a lesser life-form into something that could lay eggs - or, if you believe in god you could say that god created the chicken and it went from there.
*evil cackle* The Tyrannosaurus Rex came first, considering the Chicken is it's closest living relative! Speaking from a Kate M point of view, can't I just kill it and cook it then say I came first?