No shit... common sense much?
In order to lay a chicken egg, there must be a chicken. An egg from another species cannot evolve into a chicken egg.
In order to get a chicken, you generally need a chicken egg, but that does not mean the first chicken did not evolve from another species, or another species' egg, because unlike an egg, the chicken can evolve.
End of story.
egg = shell
chicken = everything inside the shell that eventually grows up to be on our BBQs
Last edited by kerunt; 07-14-2010 at 03:01 PM.
"Yamaha" - it's Japanese for "fuck your sports car."
If you consider the stuff inside the shell of the egg to be a "chicken" then yes, the chicken came first.
However, if you consider the egg to be separate from the chicken proper then you can argue which came first depending on when the genetic mutation occurred. The article says that the chicken came first because of a genetic mutation in a developed chicken (if we assume the first chicken hatched from a non chicken egg). But, we can't prove that the egg didn't already have the genetic mutation in it. If it did, we can argue that the egg came first has it contained the very first genetic mutation that caused the chicken to exist.
My understanding is they are saying the first chicken did not come from an egg, but perhaps was a live birth from the pre-chicken.
Many species lay eggs, way before chickens existed. so the egg came first q.e.d.
"Life is tough; it's tougher when you're stupid." -John Wayne
I knew that by experience,
Years ago when I was in the navy,
on a trip in the far east,
I got crabs and then I got eggs
R.I.P #48 Shoya Tomizawa (December 10, 1990 – September 5, 2010)
R.I.P. #58 Marco Simoncelli (January 20, 1987 – October 23, 2011)
really? people are really spending time and money on this?
Danger 4 dinner... Sex 4 breakfast...