Comment on Chicken vs Egg

lowleveldata@programming.dev ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

• rockerface@lemm.ee ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

  Chickenness is a spectrum, not a binary

  source

  • DumbAceDragon@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

    Is archeopteryx a chicken?

    source

    • Zagorath@aussie.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

      If I say no, are you going to pick the next most recent named ancestor of the chicken, and keep repeating until someone says yes?

      source

      • Whelks_chance@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

        Maybe

        source
      • variants@possumpat.io ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

        That was the original question

        source
    • WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

      Try threatening one and find out.

      source
  • dQw4w9WgXcQ@lemm.ee ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

    That’s quite controversial.

    source
• Rivalarrival@lemmy.today ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

  Is a “chicken egg” an egg laid by a chicken, or an egg that will hatch into a chicken?

  source

  • PapaStevesy@midwest.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

    It’s an egg that will hatch into a chicken, since the “first” chicken must have hatched out of an egg that was laid and fertilized by two “non-chickens” whose DNA combined together to make a full-blown chicken. Of course it wasn’t actually just one egg, but really, no matter how you think about it, the egg came first.

    source

    • NewNewAccount@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

      Can mutations that occurred during life be transmitted to offspring? Biology classes were a long time ago.

      source

      • Seleni@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

        That depends on what you mean.

        Did a giraffe stretch its neck longer and longer, and then pass that long-necked gene onto its kids? No.

        Can an embryo that gets a random mutation while developing in the egg/womb pass it on to their children? Yes.

        This gets a bit more complicated if you really dig into it, though. Environment does change the expression of genes, and that particular sequence of genes that have been activated/shut-off/whatever can be passed on to children too.

        Hence why children who were born to two shorter parents will often grow much taller than them if given much better nutrition. Or why obesity often shows up chronically in families that were poor or had limited access to healthier foods in other ways; their bodies had adapted to grab and store every extra calorie they could to guard against starvation, and unfortunately shutting that gene expression off naturally takes multiple generations.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • PapaStevesy@midwest.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

        Yes, that’s the driving force of evolution.

        source
    • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

      I agree, and I’ve made the same argument. It’s perfectly valid, Unless the egg belongs to the creature who laid it, instead of the creature that hatched from it.

      If the egg in question is a “proto-chicken’s egg” because it was laid by a proto-chicken, then the chicken would have come before the chicken egg.

      source

      • PapaStevesy@midwest.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

        No it wouldn’t. If we’re going to talk about the creation of chickens as happening at a single instance of egg-laying, the two progenitors of said first chicken would be proto-chickens whose DNA combined in the fertilized egg to make, for the first time ever, a chicken. Yes, it’s a chicken egg, because it contains a chicken, but it’s also a proto-chicken’s egg because it wasn’t laid by a full chicken. It couldn’t have been, they didn’t exist yet.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

        Feel like any kind of mutation that turns the pre chicken into the proto chicken happens at birth, if the pre chicken had a mutated offspring, I’d wager the egg is mutated significantly from what a normal pre chicken egg would be, since after all it has to support a proto chicken, not a pre chicken.

        source
  • BassTurd@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

    The former, otherwise it would be “chicken’s egg”.

    source

    • PapaStevesy@midwest.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

      Incorrect, a “chicken’s egg” would be an egg in the possession of a chicken, which would be the egg a chicken lays. The “first chicken” did not hatch out of an egg laid by a chicken because they didn’t exist.

      source

      • BassTurd@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

        You’re right. I just realized that I typed the opposite of what I meant. And then in another comment said what you did thinking I was defending my og opinion. I’m all over the place this morning.

        source
    • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

      Amy is a chicken. Amy lays an egg. Brenda is a chicken. Brenda hatched from the egg Amy laid. The egg in question is clearly a chicken’s egg, but is it Amy’s egg, or Brenda’s egg?

      source

      • BassTurd@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

        It was Amy’s egg that Brenda inherited, so now it’s Brenda’s egg. So the OG egg was Amy’s.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • candybrie@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

    I think it’s an egg laid by a chicken. Unfertilized eggs laid by chickens that will never become chickens are still chicken eggs.

    source

    • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

      That’s about where I got to as well. A proto-chicken’s egg that contains the genetic code for a chicken doesn’t become a chicken egg if I eat it first. At best, the creature has to have become a chicken before the surrounding egg can be described as a chicken egg, which means that the chicken has to come first (or simultaneously). The egg cannot come first.

      source
    • PapaStevesy@midwest.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

      We’re not talking about eggs laid by chickens, we’re talking about eggs laid by the things that weren’t quite chickens, but the eggs of which contain chickens, due to a novel DNA combination.

      source

      • candybrie@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

        The question posed is what is a chicken egg? Is it an egg from which a chicken hatches or an egg which a chicken lays. I’d argue it’s the latter. Because we already consider eggs from which no chicken could hatch but that a chicken laid, chicken eggs.

        source
  • Sadbutdru@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

    I feel like my comment in another thread is even more relevant here:

    I have no direct knowledge about that, but if we take the analogy of the egg (shell, albumen and yolk sack) being the life-support system of the embryo during gestation, in humans the placenta would be a big part of that, and exactly whose body it is part of its not simple (from what I remember both mother and child contribute cells, and the ‘plan’ for building it comes from the father’s genes). So maybe for chickens it could be ambiguous whether the shell ‘belongs’ to the laying generation or the hatching one. Seems like mostly a human taxonomy distinction to make anyway, obviously it’s in between the two, but we like to draw the line somewhere.

    source
• Lemminary@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

  When first chicken lay egg, duh!

  source

  • manucode@infosec.pub ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

    Unless you define a chicken egg as an egg of which a chicken is born (or of which a chicken could be born)

    source
• aulin@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

  Doesn’t matter as it’s not a stated in the question. It just needs to be an egg.

  source
• Rhaedas@fedia.io ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

  Wherever humans draw the line. The meme uses the assumption that there is a clear change from earlier species to later descendants, when it reality it is a continuous change of many characteristics each time an individual reproduces and spreads their genetics. It's the flaw of the missing link argument.

  source
• underwire212@lemm.ee ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

  When genetic mutation happened between non-chicken and its egg to create real chicken

  source