DNA controls what traits an animal can exibit; the environment dictates what traits it will exhibit. The traits were encoded into their DNA, but the genes were dormant, so the traits were not expressed. The animal's traits cannot be spontaneous, they were simply not expressed. So while something it was not born showing that trait, the trait was still encoded on its DNA, and it was actually there the whole time (like the Scarecrow's brain). So, the chicken would, gentically, be a chicken when it was hatched, and would just have certain useful genes "turned on," to give it a better chance of surviving its environment. So, it was a chicken since it was in the egg, and thus, the egg came first.
hey mine too but to follow that as literal is foolish you can't take the bible as pure truth because the people who wrote it didn't know as much as we do now so god wouldn't have said the exact scientific way of how things came to be my opinion god created the world and all of the mechanisms that run it ie physics, evolution etc.......
It has to be the Egg, the egg is the cell in which the chicken is born. If there is no egg no chicken will be born. So egg has to come first.
The egg came first. Lets just ignore the fact that evolution takes millions of years, and just assume that we went straight from a dinosaur to a chicken. A dinosaur lays an egg, containing the first chicken. The chicken hatches from this egg. Without the egg, the chicken would have to have just magically appeared, not have hatched, which wouldn't make any sense. On a side note: Do you believe in Evolution? Do you believe in the big bang, physics, and all other kinds of science? Do you still believe that there is a god? If so, welcome to Deism.
You guys are all over thinking this. The egg came before the chicken. Simpily because you did not ask if the chicken came before the chicken egg. So there were eggs of other animals before the chicken. Therefore my sideways view of things prevails and my logic is undeniable. Huzzah!
...You... You just completely misinterpreted a philosophical question that isn't open for interpretation. It's not clever, its just dumb.
Damn it. I didn't feel like reading the whole topic and this is what I get. But even if you want to think of it the way it is "supposed" to be answered I would say Egg first because the first chicken would've had to come from it's egg unless it *poofed* there.
ok...i think your all getting a bit too far into this...With the exeption of Wack and whoever posted that first. Cus thats just funny. The question is not actually a scientific or logical question. If using science in traditional terms the egg came first because that is where the genetic mutation would occur. Forming a chicken. If you believe creationism. God made all the animals who, thus the egg came first. The question is a simple, humorous way of defining the difference between an "evolution" concept and a "creation" concept Chicken or the egg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia