Jul 14 2010Finally, It's Settled: The Chicken Came First

chicken-egg-debate.jpg

Well folks, I know I'll be sleeping like a baby tonight. You see, I'm gonna get pass-out drunk and curl up on the bathroom floor with a towel scientists claim they now have proof that the chicken came before the egg. Great, now I'm hungry.

"It had long been suspected that the egg came first, but now we have the scientific proof that shows that in fact the chicken came first," Sheffield University's Dr Colin Freeman, according to a report in the Metro.


Researchers from Scotland and England used a supercomputer called HECToR to look in such detail at a chicken eggshell that they were able to determine the vital role of a protein used to kick-start the egg's formation.

That protein is only found, wait for it... inside a chicken.

Freeman, who worked on HECToR with counterparts at Edinburgh's Warwick University, said the protein had been identified earlier by scientists and was known to be linked to egg formation, "but by examining it closely we have been able to see how it controls the process," he added, describing it as a catalyst.

I'm not gonna lie, that was a lot less interesting than I was hoping. Also, less convincing. I give it a year before they're saying the egg came first and there's evidence a human traveled back in time to have sex with dinosaurs. Let me guess -- I left a condom wrapper.

Chicken Came Before the Egg: "Scientific Proof" [cbsnews]

Thanks to TobyRaider, who can't believe scientists waste their time on shit like this when we still don't even know why the chicken crossed the road.

Related Stories
Reader Comments

thats interesting

But the first chicken that evolved would have been inside an egg that would have been laid by what we would classify as a different species of a chicken type animal.

Therefor I still claim egg came first.

Nice to see Sheffield (MY HOMETOWN) doing it big in science

GO UK

Is it official? I will never hear this stupid saying again?

OMG the ever wondered question as to what comes first has been answered. now if you could only sex them as chicks "wink wink" they wouldn't be suck a mystery.

They came at an equal time. lets say you found an egg on the ground. You're not sure what the egg is from, so you let it hatch. When something came out of the egg, and you decided to call it a chicken, the chicken and the chicken egg both came into existance instantaniousy. If it's just the chicken or the egg, dinosaurs laid eggs way before chickens. The chicken and the chicken egg existed simultanously.

there many were dinosaur eggs way before they evolved into chickens

It's prety simular to #2, except that the egg wasn't a chicken egg until the chicken was a chicken.

Your head asplode!

Ka-pow Chicken!

God created adult chickens to run around Eden before there were any eggs. Adam's first breakfast was bacon without eggs. For lunch Eve made sandwiches.

why are we even researching this o_O?

I guess the chicken gets to claim "FIRST" then.

not having it.
as said before, whatever evolved into what can be described as 'the first chicken' would have come from an egg, just like the countless generations before.
Unless of course chickens gave birth to live young and evolved the capacity to make eggs o.O
somehow i think the latter is far less likely.

also, 12 hit the nail on the head. just wtf

Though so. All you internet peepz trying to prove me wrong. Grow up and move out of your parents basements before I...

8-But genetically it IS a chicken inside that egg even if its parent is different because whatever mutation or cross breeding caused the egg to be different. Even still, if you need a chicken to have a chicken egg, that chicken was still hatched from an egg from whatever different species of chicken that came before it.

well, i was taught that there is no start to a never ending circle. :D

HECToR + GLaDOS= <3

i was taught that there is no start to a neverending circle. :D HECToR+GLaDOS=<3

so chicken's came before chicken eggs, but i'm with becca. other species were laying eggs millions of years before anything we know to be a "chicken" first clucked on this planet.

BECCA RULES! egg first.

Egg came first.... a dinosaur laid it.

@2 and 16
You're completely right. I'm no scientist I just understand logic and it appears you do as well. the offspring of species is the next step in the evolution process. Am animal wouldn't hatch and then evolve during it's life cycle. The pre-chicken would have a laid the egg that hatched the first chicken. Even you don't know anything about evolution this should be blatantly obvious.

The chicken is a firsttard

Are you talking about evolution?! You'll all gonna go to hell!!

Ok, I'm kidding. God can lick my big hairy ball.

Egg first!!

So the unnamed creature that laid the egg that hatched the chicken was not a chicken but an ancestor of said chicken. Since we are specific to the qualification of chicken-ism then we can be specific about egg-ism.

An egg is an egg regardless of whether or not it came from a chicken...or neanderthal chicken.

So eggs, in one form or another existed long before chickens.

My answer before I read this post has always been like this.

If you are religious, the chicken.
If you believe in science, the egg.

FIRST!

Colin may have finally settled an age old question but he'll never be as popular as his cousin Gordon.

#2 has it right, and these researchers are retarded.

The chicken must've come first because the egg has a protein only found in chickens? You mean the same chickens that were born in the eggs that contain that protein? Logic fail.

Also, during evolution (damn, I'm going to hell too) the avian egg (not a dinosaur egg) that bore the first chicken started out as an egg without a chicken inside. Consider the chicken eggs we buy for making breakfast, those have not been inseminated and therefor do not have chicken fetuses inside of them. Eggs come first, always.

Dr. Freeman's "proof" is bullshit.

@22 Shelbon: Well if you want to get logical...lets get BIOlogical. :)

Some religious folks like to believe that once an egg human or not, is fertilized it is a life form.

The shell, which is what we know as the egg, is not formed until AFTER the yolk is...inseminated so technically, the chicken exists before the shell is created. IF you see things that way.

Though I tend to believe it was the Rooster, not the chicken or the egg that came first.

Idiotic.
The EGG came first. It's simple evolution-theory science. They claim that chickens are a descendant of ancient reptiles, therefore, over a long period of evolution, an "almost current day chicken" would have laid THE EGG containing THE CHICKEN! Come on, it's not difficult.
This ruined my day. Dr. Freeman needs to lose that beautiful and land marked name. He is disgracing it.

@2, 16, 19

I'm with you. If a kangaroo laid an egg and a chicken hatched from it, wouldn't that be a chicken egg and not a kangaroo egg?

This is fucking idiotic... Are scientists stupid? I don't understand how that question has been analyzed so, and never figured out. The egg obviously came before the chicken. This can be proven by the simple fact that animas such as dinosaurs (who laid eggs) came millions of years before chickens. Now if the question is if the chicken egg came before the chicken... The simple answer is that the chicken came first because there would have needed to be a chicken to lay said egg. This logic is infallible, and so I wonder why such a simple question could lead to such confusion. I dare anyone to say otherwise. Fucking idiots...

Ok first off...chicken eggs needs to be kept warm in order to hatch so if the egg came first what was there to warm it to allow it to hatch....the chicken...therefore the chicken came first to be able to warm it's eggs to be able to hatch....booooom!!! genius...thnak you....i'll be here all night.

Shouldn't the scientist Mr. Freeman be worring about way more important things than fucking around with eggs. Like things from OTHER dimentions.

It is indeed the egg as you need a gametic mutation for a trait to become inherited, you also have to have a arcatypal idea of what a chicken is, or rather the exact dna sequence of a modern chicken. there would have been at some point a gametic mutation which would bring a very similar pre-chicken to then have a chicken as it's offspring. It's all about the word gametic. Because it's a choice word... word.

I thought the Rooster came first...

The chicken may have come before the chicken egg, but the pre-chicken egg that hatched the first chicken came first.

So if we're talking egg and chicken, not chicken egg and chicken, egg wins.

okay 29 just blew my mind.
I acknowledge the formation of the chicken precedes the egg.

@34 lol.

In other news, cancer remains uncured.

If it's coming from science, I can only assume that it is a THEORY, and they are teaching everyone like it is a fact and they have proof. :]

Beyond the obvious "evolution means that the chicken predates the chicken-producing-egg", "there were things that laid eggs prior to chickens, so eggs came first", or "chicken begins at conception" points... there's a big flaw in the science behind this.

"We have found evidence that proves that the eggs we looked at came from chickens" tells you only where the eggs you looked at came from. It gives no useful insight into the egg v. chicken question since they were not look at the alpha egg (the first egg).

must be exciting to be a scientist in england!!

The thing is, the first creature to have this protein could have died out millions of years ago. Perhaps the dinosaur that the chicken evolved from had the protein. Then it's children would have the protein and it's children's children would have the protein and each generation would be slightly less like a dinosaur and more like a chicken. Eventually, we have the modern chicken and without looking at the past it would seem that the egg cannot exist without the chicken's protein. The protein isn't really as unique to the chicken as these scientists seem to think, though. The truth is, neither really came first because species are constantly changing. There is no definable point where the dinosaur stopped existing and the chicken started so there is no definable first chicken or first chicken egg.

Sadly, My boyfriend and me broke up a month ago. yeah.. i'm young ,beautiful,lonely and still hurting.i may be in need of someone to love..still..My friends told me about A G EM I N GL E .( o M and i got curious about it.. they met their boyfriends there.,It's the best place to meet an older boyfriend or a younger girlfriend. i cant risk myself..So i got a usename(Anny888) there in order to find a new boyfriend.is it wrong?000000000##rerevhg

With some Dinosoar Ladieeeeeeeee!

First!!

@34 &40: Trust me, you don't want a 'scientist' like Mr. Freeman trying any higher research than this. It seems more like he was given the simplest assignment that the funders would dish out as a favor.... then failed miserably.

These scientists are dumb, really dumb


Since we know that dinosaurs laid eggs isn't this "timeless philosophical question" as simple as proving that dinosaurs predated chickens?

The hell! I knew about this already and I didn't even finished university yet. Waste of money on research. Dumb scientist. Go create cold fusion; now that's something!

common sense would have to you that the chicken came first in either the theory of god or evolution.
something had to lay and incubate the egg.

god
In Genisis the Bible speaks of how God created all of the animals. Now these animals were meant to procreate and become many same as Adam and Eve right? So why would God first create the egg without a living incubator? It's actually pure logic when you think about it. An egg cannot survive on it's own, it could freeze, rot, get stepped on, or get eaten by another creature.

evolution
Using the hypothesis known as the "Big Bang Theory" it is absolutely impossible for the egg to come first. If everything evolved from something else there had to be a chicken-type bird thus a chicken to lay and hatch an egg that would be the chicken we have today.

so no matter what the chicken came first.

Warwick University is not in Edinburgh, it is, in fact, quite far from Edinburgh, all the way down in England. The person who wrote that article ftl.

Wouldn't this cause controversy amongst the whole abortion debate?
If a chicken is already considered a chicken before the egg even exists...
Then wouldn't that also change the definition of since when an embryo is considered a human?

The answer is 42.

It's always been the chicken. Here's some reassuring info: Beginning of life blah blah blah we were all from formations of small one bodied cells (that were formed from different chemical compositions that eventually formed into independent functioning organic components) that split and such, as millions of years passed reproduction soon changed from splitting into two organisms to live birth & egg laying from tiny fishy critters. Chicken came first suckahs!

IT is very simple,
They always ask, the egg or the chicken
never the chicken egg or the chicken

so obviously the egg (dinosaur or whatever) was here before the chicken
i'm realy sick of dumb people arguing about this

This is ridiculous. Both chicken and egg are divergent evolutions.

Originally, there was cell division. i.e. one cell became two. Over a period of time, one of the cells got bigger and bigger, and multi-cellular, and got harder and harder shells. Another one turned into a chicken. The ultimate evolution is where complex cell division occurs where one cell cluster (which we call a chicken) begats another one (we call an egg).

Silly scientists. Eggs don't come. The chicken may come first if the rooster is really good. Just sayin'

Post a Comment

Please keep your comments relevant to the post. Inappropriate or promotional comments may be removed. Email addresses are required to confirm comments but will never be displayed. To create a link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments.