dont babys come from chickens??
362548
Chicks came from chickens. Chickens came from eggs. Babies come from different origins...ok?
64857
richard is right.\n\nTo boys4ever: How can you have a creature without an egg to hatch it?  Unless, of course, you are suggesting that some chicken like creature gave live birth to the first chicken!
1123206
Science tells us that chickens evolved from non-chickens through small changes caused by the mixing of male and female DNA or by mutations to the DNA that produced the zygote ( egg). These changes and mutations only have an effect at the point where a new zygote is created. That is, two non-chickens mated and the DNA in their new zygote contained the mutations that produced the first true chicken.  \nSo i would this it's safe to assume that the egg came first.\n\nBest of luck to you.
979341
Roosters don't lay eggs = P
211980
....and goes ROAST??\n\nor the answer to egg-chicken ques....\n\nThe modern chicken is generally believed to be a descendant of "Archaeopteryx", the oldest known bird. This 150 million ear old resident of the jurassic period laid eggs, and at some point of time, evolved into an animal that was one generation away from being a proper chicken. This creature would have produced the egg out of qwhich the first chicken emerged...the EGG came first.
417879
This question appears regularly in the question file, so let's take a shot at it. \n\nIn nature, living things evolve through changes in their DNA. In an animal like a chicken, DNA from a male sperm cell and a female ovum meet and combine to form a zygote -- the first cell of a new baby chicken. This first cell divides innumerable times to form all of the cells of the complete animal. In any animal, every cell contains exactly the same DNA, and that DNA comes from the zygote. \n\nChickens evolved from non-chickens through small changes caused by the mixing of male and female DNA or by mutations to the DNA that produced the zygote. These changes and mutations only have an effect at the point where a new zygote is created. That is, two non-chickens mated and the DNA in their new zygote contained the mutation(s) that produced the first true chicken. That one zygote cell divided to produce the first true chicken. \n\nPrior to that first true chicken zygote, there were only non-chickens. The zygote cell is the only place where DNA mutations could produce a new animal, and the zygote cell is housed in the chicken's egg. So, the egg must have come first.
867049
They dont, birds do. Humans can not catch a virus from birds tho, so there has to be a middleman (well pig). Birds give the virus to hogs, who then with a little twist of the virus give it to humans (hence the first name of swine flew). The best place for this to happen is a place that has both foul & pigs (a farm) so that is why you always hear about chickens & ducks (but it can be any bird).
663991
The egg.\nBefore chickens evloved into chickens, they were some other species that laid egss.\nOf course, if you are a creationist, you'll dispute that.
408557
chicks as in baby chickens... I think that as long as you feed chickens they don't care what you look like or where you are from
653881
Chickens go through a rigorous training program to "train them" to lay eggs that fit the standard size egg-cups.\n\nChickens that fail to learn how to do this are generally slaughtered for chicken meat.
514768
Final and scientifically agreed answer, thanks to some scientists with too much time on their hands\n\nExtract from the Guardian:\n\n"Whether the panel solved that debate is not clear, but they were unanimous on the correct chicken/egg pecking order. John Brookfield, an evolutionary geneticist at the University of Nottingham said the solution involves piecing together the speciation event in which chickens first evolved.\n\nHe imagines two non-chicken parents getting together and giving rise to the first individual of a new species because of a genetic mutation. "The first chicken must have differed from its parents by some genetic change, perhaps a very subtle one, but one which caused this bird to be the first ever to fulfil our criteria for truly being a chicken," said Prof Brookfield.\n\n"Thus the living organism inside the eggshell would have had the same DNA as the chicken that it would develop into, and thus would itself be a member of the species of chicken," he added."
370388
Interesting fact.  God did NOT create chickens!  They are a human creation.  A hybrid of 2 other types of birds.  They wanted to be able to combine the tastiness of one bird with the domesticability of another, and voila, they got a chicken.
1162531
Actually this has a real answer. According to the book "Random Kinds of Factness: 1001 (or so) Absolutely True Tidbits About (mostly) Everything" by Erin Barrett and Jack Mingo the egg came first.\n\nAccording to their research chickens evolved from early Indochina birds called red jungle fowl. Mutations in the jungle fowls eggs produced things more like chickens...these bred with other bird causing more mutations producing todays chicken.\n\nSo the eggs have it!
280647
"In nature, living things evolve through changes in their DNA. In an animal like a chicken, DNA from a male sperm cell and a female ovum meet and combine to form a zygote -- the first cell of a new baby chicken. This first cell divides innumerable times to form all of the cells of the complete animal. In any animal, every cell contains exactly the same DNA, and that DNA comes from the zygote. \n\nChickens evolved from non-chickens through small changes caused by the mixing of male and female DNA or by mutations to the DNA that produced the zygote. These changes and mutations only have an effect at the point where a new zygote is created. That is, two non-chickens mated and the DNA in their new zygote contained the mutation(s) that produced the first true chicken. That one zygote cell divided to produce the first true chicken. \n\nPrior to that first true chicken zygote, there were only non-chickens. The zygote cell is the only place where DNA mutations could produce a new animal, and the zygote cell is housed in the chicken's egg. So, the egg must have come first."
87033
The answer is either “No” with a but or “Yes” with an and.\n\nRobins and chickens are totally separate species of birds. They are no more closely related than humans are to baboons. You wouldn’t expect a human and a baboon to be able to mate and produce babies would you? So no, robins and chickens can’t interbreed.\n\nHowever there are many different species of animal that CAN interbreed and produce offspring. But the different species need to be fairly closely related, far more closely than human and baboon… or a chicken and a robin.\n\nFor example we can interbreed horses and donkeys to produce baby mules, and we can breed cattle and buffalo, or camels and llamas. \n\nAnd the same is true of birds. While chickens can’t be bred with robins they are often bred with guinea fowl and pheasants for example, and occasionally bred with turkeys (see links below). \n\n\nSo to answer the question, yes different types of bird can mate and produce chicks, there's no doubt about that. But chickens and robins are not two types that are capable of it. Chickens and turkeys or chickens and pheasants are.\n\n\n>>>>>A robin and a chicken might be a stretch, but how about\n>>>>>two different types of sparrows? \n\nYes, in fact the various sparrow species are amongst the most likely to hybridise.\n\n>>>>>>Does it ever happen in the wild?\n\nRegularly. See the last two links.\n\n__________________________\n\nAddenda\n\nScientist said: "Only organisms of the same species can produce viable offspring"\n\nThat is simply not true. \n\nI know they teach you that in school, but it has no factual basis whatsoever and is not accepted by any biologist anywhere on the planet.\n\nJust to name a few examples cattle and bison, wolves and coyotes and fin and blue whales are all perfectly capable of breeding. They all interbreed commonly in the wild and the offspring are all perfectly fertile and have young themselves. \n\nEven lions and tigers will produce offspring that are capable of producing cubs, though most are not, and there have been at least 2 documented cases of mules having foals.\n\n\nUnless someone wants to argue that cattle and buffalo are the same species then ability to produce fertile offspring doesn't prevent two animals being seperate species in any way.\n\n\nSal said: "There are different kinds of chickens that can interbreed with each other. But a chicken can't breed with a turkey."\n\nA total lie with no basis in reality. I just provided links which prove that turkeys can breed with chickens.\n\nSal also said"This is one of thousands of examples as to why the theory of evolution is hard to swallow. If animals can change into other kinds of animals, you would be able to see at least a slight form of interbreeding betweeen different species, but you dont."\n\nWell since I have proved this belief completely wrong, and Sal now knosw that interspecies breding is common, even in the wild, I guess Sal will now accept evolution?\n\nYeah, right. Like facts and evidence played any part his belief.
366427
The egg came first, because before there were any chickens at all, there was the species that mutated/evolved into the chicken (some sort of dinosaur, no doubt). That species was invariably an egg laying creature, and therefore, there were eggs long before there were chickens.
28479
Have you ever seen a 1 day old chick?  There is NO meat on them at all.  No, they are made from full grown chickens. Whomever told you that was smoking something really bad to think that.  They are seriously mistaken.