For the evolution scientists, which came first the chicken or the egg?
I don't think this dilemma has been fully explained or explored. All evolution scientists and biologists, please explain...
I'm not a scientist, but then one doesn't need to be a scientist to answer this question.
From an evolutionary perspective the EGG came first, because egg laying animals were around for millions of years before the first birds evolved. Dinosaurs laid eggs, I'm sure you're aware of that fact, and it was certain theropod dinosaurs that evolved into modern day birds.
If we're going to look at which came first the chicken or the chicken egg the question itself makes no sense. It'd be like asking which came first the adult human being or the baby human being you can't have one without the other. There are no hard full-stop lines in evolution, there was no singular moment when a non-human gave birth to a human. There would be generation upon generation of gray area where it'd be difficult to say whether what we're looking at is actually a chicken yet.
Every single species is in constant transition, every generation is slightly different than the one before it.
My personal opinion, this delemma can be easily avoided if you allow for the possibility of a super natural creation or an Intelligent design. We have made great progress in genetics and DNA analysis. The original chicken was created in a test tube.
There is no dilemma here when we're talking about evolution.
OK, can evolution theory explain it so that I can understand how this come about, with all our understanding of DNA and reproduction...?
I already answered this question. There is no point in the evolution of the chicken that you can point to and say the egg or chicken came first, the question itself does not make sense in terms of evolution.
Jack Lee, would you think molecular changes taking place in a primordial soup of sulphuric compounds, in temperatures much higher than ours, to be the workings of a super natural designer?
No, I don't think an intelligent designer would take that path. He would start out with the finished product.
There is no finished product in evolution, that's why the "dilemma" isn't actually a dilemma at all. There is no point at which a non-chicken laid a chicken egg or vice versa. Evolution doesn't have hard/solid lines like that.
Jack, don't you see the beauty of creation in evolution of species?
I see the beauty of all God's creations, all the variety of animals and plant. In some cases, attributes that are not beneficial to the survival and yet they exist. For evolution theory proponents, these are hard to explain away...
You do not see the wisdom of the concepts introduced by monk Gregor Mendel and Linnaeus introduced many years before Darwin?
You cannot accept any version of Theistic Evolution?
This is to Titen-Sxull
You seem to be answering the question of a specific animal and a general egg. Maybe the question should read "Which came first, the chicken or the chicken egg?" If that's the question then using the premise set out by your statement the chicken had to come first because it would have had to be fully evolved as a chicken before it could procreate as a chicken by laying an egg.
There doesn't seem to be much Design and certainly not Intelligent.
We have a garbage belt through our solar system alone that has been playing pinata with the planets and their moons for billions of years.
Any one them could wipe out the Earth as we know it today.
It is clear that dinosaurs preceded the humans, and they should have been here first.
We have trillions of objects in the universe that serve no useful purpose for us, if we were the object of an "Intelligent Design".
We have numerous black holes that are like galaxy trash compactors.
Again, the rest of the universe is not meaningful to us on Earth.
An intelligent design for us could have been accomplished without a universe or even a solar system. And it could have been done without even a Sun.
It is looking more like the infinite number of monkeys and infinite number of typewriters than any kind of design.
Even the environment on earth is not a design, intelligent or otherwise. It is more like life Adapted to its harsh and deadly acts. Earthquakes, Typhoons, Tsunamis, Volcanoes, Floods, Pestilence, etc. We also have deadly creatures to deal with here.
How is this a design, much less intelligence.
If this was a product created by man, it would be rejected as Defective?
I totally disagree with that assessment of humanity. I challenge you to come up with a better design of a creature with our intellect, our mobility, our dexterity and our diversity and our curiosity...
Give it a shot...
You only disagreed with humans, but the world and the universe are not mentioned by you to contradict my statements on them.
Humans pale in comparison to the physical abilities of most other creatures. I don't have enough characters left.
If you delve into the beautifully integrated cycles of life and geology on this planet, then you will see that, over time, everything and every process results in the production of "life."
You will also see the death and destruction.
Bradmaster, I wrote a hub on the perfect human you might want to check it out. As you say, there are not enough space here to discuss fully. My point is, if you were God, you would have a hard time coming up with a better package than humans.
Jack, a human being is hardly a good example of a "perfect" creation. Study anatomy and you will see how the body has adapted and changed over time. Examples include the appendix, eye, brain, and tailbone, just to name a few!
It would seem to me from an evolutionary perspective we have to say not egg necessarily, but eggs. The chicken was not a chicken until the mating and offspring of what it was before changed that. There was no poof - presto chicken. It developed out of a survival of the fittest notion. So that eventually the egg of one animal produced the chicken as we know it. It needed a combination of genetic material over time. So the chicken as we think of it today came from two birds mating which produced an egg which produced a chicken as we know it today. Certainly gradual, but each egg produced more of the chicken we know. It is the great combination of male and female genetics which produced an egg that produced a chicken.
Perhaps you are not understanding my question. Only 250 char. to reply. In order for the egg to happen, many genetic changes are necessary. How does a pre-chicken animal mate and develop the egg in one swoop? How did this pre-chicken reproduce before
Clearly I said gradually as is the course of evolution. I did not say in "one swoop".
True, but practically, how do you imagine a reproductive system evolve from one form to an egg system? Slowly... That is the problem with evolution. Somethings require too many changes to be effective which statistically will be astonomical to work.
Yes Jack you have a great point. That is why I agree to an extent evolution. But it has to happen through something extraordinary. Something that is Godlike.
I can listen to all of these points and opinions, not agreeing/disagreeing necessarily with either. But I always come back to a sense of awe and admiration... this keeps my mind in the realm of sanity!
by Ron Karn 8 years ago
If all life forms evolved from a single organism, where did the first organism originate from? It seems to me that to classify the science of evolution as scientific fact that they would need to establish a basis from where to begin, with an answer to this question. My research has led...
by John Sarkis 3 years ago
What do Evolutionists really mean by "Intelligent Design?"For example: if you believe in Einstein's "Big Bang Theory" - then wouldn't the universe/cosmos had to be "Intelligent" enough in order to bring itself into existence? I've oftentimes heard...
by marinealways24 9 years ago
Is Evolution an Intelligent or Ignorant Design?
by janesix 7 years ago
It just means evolution was designed by god
by singleaple 6 years ago
Does the question what came first the chicken or the egg indicate a presence superior to man ?Does the riddle of this question indicate the necessary presence of something that was superior to man (in order to create one or the other in the first place) ?
by Andrew Petrou 2 years ago
Does astrophysicist Neil Degrasse Tyson now favour "intelligent design"?Has noted (former?) atheist astrophysicist Degrasse Tyson now joined the growing ranks of atheist scientists who are hedging their bets that the universe is a kind of "simulation" created by a superior...
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|