Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => That CAN'T be true! => Topic started by: robin clark on 02/08/2009 11:30:02
-
robin clark asked the Naked Scientists:
We found a worm in a egg and we need to know what to do, also my brother got sick...
What do you think?
-
Are you sure is wasn't this normal structure ...
[ Invalid Attachment ]
http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/birds/info/chicken/egg.shtml
In animal eggs, the chalaza is composed of one or two spiral bands of tissue that suspend the yolk in the center of the white. It does not act like an umbilical cord; the growing embryo receives its nutrients from the yolk. The purpose of the chalaza is to hold the yolk in place.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chalaza
-
Perhaps the egg was fertile. The 'worm' was the early stages of development.
-
Can you also tell me which came first? The chicken or the egg?
-
Niether, the sausages come first, then the bacon, the egg is always last.
-
Oi! Stop ducking my question!
-
Oi! Stop ducking my question!
You can't even spell it right!
-
Was that a pun?
-
Allow me to elucidate:
Oi! Stop ducking my question!
You can't even spell it right!
"F"
-
Eh? I'm still in the dark. Really.
-
The "worm" could be a chicken parasite.
It's possible it entered the egg in its development stage, before it had a shell.
-
That yolk's been cracked already.
-
Should we re-name the forum?
The Naked Pun Forum.
-
robin clark asked the Naked Scientists:
We found a worm in a egg and we need to know what to do, also my brother got sick...
What do you think?
So may I ask a dumb question...?
I am only assuming that you found the worm in the egg first before ingestion right.. so then your brother went ahead and knowingly ate the egg with the worm..?
OR....
Did you remove the worm, and did the thought make him sick or the actual after effects from eating the worm infested egg make him sick?
-
EUREKA!!!! I've got it!
This a new species of chicken which lays 'breakfast eggs'. They come complete with a sausage in them. Next step, a rasher of bacon, then beans, mushrooms (https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.freesmileys.org%2Fsmileys%2Fsmiley-violent001.gif&hash=b595392ee6a5c64aee35cf92c54e58e1) (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php) OUCH! Alright, I was only joking.
-
Can you also tell me which came first? The chicken or the egg?
The chicken had to come first. A paradox arises if you allow the egg to pre-existent to the thing which gives birth too.
-
No, the first chicken had to come from somewhere, so the egg came first.
-
No, the first chicken had to come from somewhere, so the egg came first.
Evolution did play a part you know. The chicken could not have always laid eggs.
-
Yes, it could always have laid eggs. No female chicken has ever reproduced without laying an egg.
Obviously the chicken evolved from a non-chicken ancestor, but the first chicken (or the populations of birds we might have called the first chickens due to sufficient divergence of traits) grew inside that ancestor's egg, not a chicken egg. Therefore the chicken came before the chicken egg [:P]
If you want to talk about the first egg in general (egg cells included), well, that came many hundreds of millions of years ago [;)]
-
Yes, it could always have laid eggs. No female chicken has ever reproduced without laying an egg.
Obviously the chicken evolved from a non-chicken ancestor, but the first chicken (or the populations of birds we might have called the first chickens due to sufficient divergence of traits) grew inside that ancestor's egg, not a chicken egg. Therefore the chicken came before the chicken egg [:P]
If you want to talk about the first egg in general (egg cells included), well, that came many hundreds of millions of years ago [;)]
How could it have always laid eggs, and thus what laid that egg? Chickens, like all animals come from some common-source ancestor... Ourselves for instance, have been genetically-traced to a shrew-like creature which existed a very long time ago. Physiological and biological makeup has changed so much, we have things this shrew did not.
Much like the chicken, its not always been a chicken; in a massive evolutionary jump, a common-ancestor (unique as its own species) had a genetic change. The change resolves the paradox appropriately, as the chicken had not always laid eggs.
-
Of course chickens have not always been chickens due to evolution. I am not disputing this.
But for as long as chickens have been chickens, they have been laying chicken eggs. No female chicken has ever reproduced without producing a chicken egg. That is what I mean by "chickens have always laid eggs".
As I see it, the paradox is resolved by the fact that the first chicken egg was laid by the first chicken, and the first chicken hatched from the egg of its pre-chicken ancestor(which would have differed only imperceptably from a chicken). So the chicken came before the chicken egg, but eggs in general have been around for much longer.
-
Of course chickens have not always been chickens due to evolution. I am not disputing this.
But for as long as chickens have been chickens, they have been laying chicken eggs. No female chicken has ever reproduced without producing a chicken egg. That is what I mean by "chickens have always laid eggs".
As I see it, the paradox is resolved by the fact that the first chicken egg was laid by the first chicken, and the first chicken hatched from the egg of its pre-chicken ancestor(which would have differed only imperceptably from a chicken). So the chicken came before the chicken egg, but eggs in general have been around for much longer.
Look where i bolded. What makes you think this shouldn't be the case anyway?
The chicken will always lay an egg now, because that is how its genes have told it to reproduce itself. The chicken- egg paradox escapes the idea that there was some change where an ancestor mutated into an egg-producing organism.
Quite simple really.
-
I don't think I understand what your point is.
The bold part is in response to what you said earlier, "The chicken could not have always laid eggs."
All vertebrates have reproduced by the production of egg cells since before vertebrates first evolved. Some of those vertebrates lay their egg cells as eggs, for example fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and monotremes. The immediate ancestors of chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus), were Asian Jungle Fowl (genus Gallus), which laid eggs. The first chicken did not hatch from a chicken egg, it hatched from an Asian Jungle Fowl egg.
From all this we can say that eggs in general (i.e. non-chicken eggs) came before chickens.
We can also say that chickens came before chicken eggs, because chicken eggs can only be produced by chickens.
There is no paradox when these details are considered.
-
Well, i'm not going on about this forever. My point was that evolution sufficed for many different pradoxes, like the chicken and the egg one.