CreateDebate


Debate Info

19
15
chicken EGG
Debate Score:34
Arguments:21
Total Votes:41
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 chicken (10)
 
 EGG (11)

Debate Creator

cricketshade(6) pic



who came first the egg or the chicken ????

i am doing a project on this so guys i really need your support plzz comment and vote for who do you think came first peace 

chicken

Side Score: 19
VS.

EGG

Side Score: 15

Problem:The solution to the age-old question, "What came first, the chicken or the egg?" depends on whether you are a creationist or an evolutionist. The answer, however, is still the same if you assume that the egg in question is a chicken egg. "The chicken came first." If the egg in question is NOT a chicken egg, then the egg came first because there were dinosaur eggs before there were chickens.

The crux of the problem hinges on the definition of a chicken egg. Is a chicken egg an egg that comes from a chicken or an egg that contains a chicken? Many people think of a chicken egg as a chicken eggshell that contains a chicken fetus. In other words, the chicken and the egg problem exist because people typically think of a chicken egg as a single entity (chicken eggshell and chicken fetus together). I will attempt to show that this configuration (chicken eggshell and chicken fetus together) is not necessary in order to create a chicken and that an egg should thus be classified by the species that laid it rather than by what species it contains.

I think that it is safe to say that the chicken fetus is the most obvious part of a chicken egg. The eggshell, however, is trickier because if the eggshell contains any genetic material, then one could argue that the eggshell is part of the fetus and thus the chicken egg could be classified as a single entity. Since the eggshell is made of calcium, we can safely say that the chicken egg consists of two distinct parts (the chicken eggshell and chicken fetus).

A problem still exists, however. Who generates the eggshell? If the fetus generates the eggshell then one could argue that the eggshell is part of the fetus and thus a fertilized chicken egg could be classified as a single entity. But there exists unfertilized eggs. This means that a fetus is not necessary in order to generate the eggshell. Maybe all that is necessary to generate the eggshell is the unfertilized genetic material provided by the hen. Since the complexity of generating an eggshell is beyond the capability of unfertilized genetic material, and since the unfertilized genetic material belongs to (and is generated by) the hen, it is safe to say that the hen generates the eggshell.

This reduces the eggshell to the status of a container. If the eggshell is nothing more than a container, then almost any container with egg like properties should be sufficient to incubate a chicken fetus. If an eggshell/container is capable of carrying almost any fetus of a different species to term, then we cannot classify the eggshell/container by its content. Rather, we should classify the eggshell/container by the species that created the eggshell/container. For example, if scientists were successful in hatching a chicken from a plastic container, would you then call the plastic container and the chicken fetus (together) a chicken egg? Or would you say that the plastic container held a chicken fetus? As another example, if scientists were able to extract the fertilized genetic material from a chicken egg and insert it into a duck egg, would the duck egg be reclassified as a chicken egg? Or would you maintain the "duck egg" classification and state that the duck egg in question contains a chicken fetus? My belief is that (in both examples) most people would choose the later (maintain the "plastic container/duck egg" classification and add the "chicken fetus" qualifier). In other words, an egg should be classified by the species that laid it rather than by what species it contains.

Once we agree on the definition of a chicken egg (an eggshell generated by a hen regardless of content), the solution is trivial.

Solution:

Creationist: God said, "Let there be a hen." Otherwise, who would sit on the egg? Alternatively, God could have said, "Let there be a rooster." and then decided that the rooster needed companionship and so He created the hen and they then begot the egg. NOTE: Since God is perfect, it is unlikely that he said, "Let there be a chicken egg. Oh, and I almost forgot, let there be a hen to sit on that chicken egg. Ooh, wait, and a rooster!"

Evolutionist: Some animal (not a chicken) laid an egg (not a chicken egg). The fetus inside the egg underwent some minor evolutionary change that resulted into a hen. This hen then laid the first chicken egg. Alternatively, the result was a rooster. The rooster then mated with some animal (not a chicken) that laid an egg (not a chicken egg, since the rooster's DNA could not have affected the egg). The result was (eventually) a hen who then laid the first chicken egg.

Chicken and the Egg, Alternate Solution

A chicken and an egg are lying in bed. The chicken is leaning against the headboard smoking a cigarette with a satisfied smile on its face. The egg, looking a bit ticked off, grabs the sheet, rolls over and says ... Well, I guess we finally answered "THAT question!"

Side: chicken
2 points

chicken is faster stronger older and more experienced, the egg has no legs eyes and cannot see where it is going

Side: chicken
Canin88(110) Disputed
2 points

This doesn't answer the question of which came first......

Side: EGG
2 points

There is too much hardship for an egg to survive unattended. It needs to be warmed (which is why birds sit on their eggs) and protected and it needs both a mother and a father [a hen and a rooster] to develop.

Side: chicken
2 points

I think the chicken was first, because if we use our mind us a humane, we will found that God when he created the world , The GOD created the first man, not a small baby.for this reason i guess the chicken was first.

Side: chicken
2 points

The chicken, but only if the question is 'what came first, the chicken or the CHICKEN EGG'. Obviously there were eggs before there were chickens, lots of animals lay eggs. We name an egg to the one that lays it. If a crocodile lays an egg, it's called a crocodile egg. If an animal comes out of that egg that looks like a crocodile but is actually an evolved sort of crocodile, it still came out of a crocodile egg. If an Auricana chicken is fertilized by a Brahma rooster, the egg will still be called an Auricana egg, even if the chick that comes out of it is not an Auricana. So first there was an egg, a certain type of bird egg, and the chicken came out of that egg. This first chicken layed the first chicken egg. So the chicken was first.

Side: chicken
1 point

The Chicken.

A chicken and rooster need to be around to fertilise the egg and keep it warm.

Side: chicken

I will say that the chicken came first because it took that chicken to lay the egg.

Side: chicken

Chicken.. i think... Who laid the egg, the chicken so it is something that science can never find out...

Side: chicken

What about asking God.... HE made them anyway......................................

Side: chicken
0 points

i think that chicken came first okay goo chickens. i also believe that god sent chickens to the earth form the heaven how can he send and egg.

Side: chicken
1 point

because if there were no egg there would be no chicken. i vote for the egg

Side: EGG
1 point

Well over a evolving time the first chick creature was born the modern one in an egg so the egg

Side: EGG
1 point

it is actually obvious...!!! without egg a chicken can't produce egg...!!!

and if there's egg it will grow and form into chicken and produce egg again..!! that the cycle..!!!

Side: EGG
1 point

The egg came first because a avian species very similar to a chicken laid an egg that was slightly mutated, causing the birth of the first chicken. However, since the egg that the chicken was hatched from came first, the egg came first.

Side: EGG
1 point

If there's no egg, there's no chicken. What came before an egg? Something that was not a chicken, of course.

Side: EGG
1 point

In the sense of Creationism, the Bible doesn't state whether God created the chicken or the egg first.

Luckily, we have a fossil record that shows evolution to have occurred in the past, so we can approach this from an evolutionary viewpoint.

We have a creature that the chicken evolved from, but it was not a chicken. Let's call it a notken. Now, evolution takes place when a mutation occurs, but these mutations don't occur in grown creatures. They occur in the offspring of the creatures. So, the notken will never turn into a chicken, but the notken can lay an egg. As the creature inside the egg develops, the mutation takes place, making the final change needed for a notken to change into a chicken.

You would think then, that the chicken came first, but you would be wrong, because the chicken still came from an egg. Before that egg, there were no chickens. After that egg, there were. It was the first chicken, and it came from the first chicken egg.

The egg came first.

Side: EGG

technically the egg came first because there were thousands of species that laid eggs before chickens came into existince. ex. dinasaurs.

Side: EGG
1 point

The life cycle of a chicken goes like this:

Egg-Chick-Chicken

So why should chickens be in front of eggs!

Side: EGG
1 point

The outcome of the eggs changed over time. Evolution in an eggshell.

Side: EGG
0 points

Originally, an organism very close to a chicken gave birth to a slightly different egg that contained what we could call a chicken.

Side: EGG