Chicken Vs. Egg

lol nice add!

Egg.  Unless you're a creationist. :P

now thats just not true, the 5th day God created fish before birds

Oh, I guess it depends on if we're insisting that they be chicken eggs. :)

i assumed not offcourse, but in that case the debate is still open because define a chicken egg, or define a chicken? Argh  lets talk about something else plzzzz!

hee hee hee.

Chicken. EGGS DO NOT APPEAR BY THEMSELVES, DAMMIT.

And who says it’s the creationist side? The chicken could’ve been the first of its kind had it evolved.

Well, from a Darwinian perspective, animals don't evolve after they're born. The first chicken's ancestor would have been a non-chicken whose egg was influenced by a random genetic mutation that occured during cell division, producing a chicken embryo. So if you accept that an egg containing a chicken embryo is a chicken egg, then according to evolution, the egg came first, from a non-chicken parent.

Then again, if you choose to define an chicken egg as an egg  laid by a chicken, well, then, the "egg" faction is kind of screwed.

Meanwhile, if you're pro-life, the egg already is a chicken, and the whole thing is irrelevant.  ;)

Aren't you sorry you asked?

I do define a chicken egg as an egg laid by a chicken.

Because, as I said, chicken eggs do not appear by themselves.

I'll put all my money on the chicken!!!

"A chicken is just an egg's way of making another egg"

I can't remember where that comes from. 

If we're talking chicken egg, then the chicken came first, but if we're talking any kind of egg, then the egg came first.

If you're asking where the chicken came from... the other side of the road.

Haa~ good answer!!!

I agree completely with -bailey-.  In the quick, simplistic way in which I try to explain my reasoning to inquirers, somewhere along the line, a dino-chicken laid a modern-chicken egg. 

 On the other hand, you could suppose that if the definition of "chicken" was larger ...

No, nevermind.  That still proves my point.  Because then the dino-chicken must have been laid by an even more pre-historic chicken ...

It really is strange.

Just trying to be open-minded.  (In vain.)

Achingly,

Kittilyn.

Quote: 

"EGGS DO NOT APPEAR BY THEMSELVES, DAMMIT."

- inyourpanorama

Haha.  Nice.

Adverbedly,

Kittilyn.

it has to be the egg first because the debate usuallyisnt said wat came first the chicken or the chicken egg its just call the egg so it could be any kind of egg from a pre genetic chicken , but if u do believe in the creationist theory then ur still wrong b/c it would hve to be chickenS plural or else u still wouldnt be able to get an egg

Yesterday I had scrambled eggs for breakfast and fried chicken for lunch.

why did they use chickens - i mean why cant it be which came first the duck or the egg - or the croc or the egg? - My vote nevertheless is egg as evolution happens with generations not within a life span

Chickens are just more common than either of those.

ya but there are morecommon animals then chickens    like fish!

Plenty of humans eat chicken eggs (not me, though…) while caviar is just gross.

well i do eat eggs (chicken not fish), n if the egg was created first without a chicken to protect it then im sure a caveman would have eaten it , so the chicken must have come first

Both chicken and chicken egg evolved simultaniously. However, if you want to get microtechnical, we identify reproductive cells and organs, like eggs as beloging to the mother, so shouldn't the chicken have come first?  Maybe not. Perhaps the mother would not be considered a chicken, but a chick, until she grew her first egg, making it possible, once again, that they created eachother simultaniously.

the chicken comes first…

normally in my life i come first – but thats a different story

HAHAHA!

who added this as "Best Breakfast"?

genious.  : D

which comes first? egg or chick? nyahaha!