Reply With Quote
Then how did the chicken become a chicken?
Chicken-and-Egg Mystery Finally Cracked
Published July 14, 2010
| The Sun
British scientists believe they have found the answer to an ages-old question: Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
Scientists cracked the puzzle after discovering that the formation of eggs is possible only thanks to a protein found in chicken's ovaries. That means eggs have to be formed in chickens first.
The protein -- called ovocledidin-17 (OC-17) -- speeds up the development of the s . Researchers from Sheffield and Warwick universities in England laid out their findings in the paper "Structural Control of Crystal Nuclei by an Eggs Protein."
They used a supercomputer to zoom in on the formation of an egg and realized the protein is vital in kick-starting the crystallization process. It works by converting calcium carbonate into the calcite crystals that make up the egg s .
Dr Colin Freeman, from Sheffield University's Department of Engineering Materials, said "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."
"The protein had been identified before and it was linked to egg formation, but by examining it closely we have been able to see how it controls the process," Freeman said.
"It's very interesting to find that different types of avian species seem to have a variation of the protein that does the same job."
It is hoped the discovery leads to the invention of new materials.
Then how did the chicken become a chicken?
Evolution
from what
Science always ruins everything
Hmmm Eggs Benedict...
pollo loco
a re ed fish frog maybe?
dinosaurs
Why would Science have to solve something they already had all the answers to according to Ruff and his wannabee scientists?Scientists Solve Age-Old
Oh, oh.....that boot with the tree in it should be appearing any time now.
Pages and pages of Ruff and his Darwin lovers have been lecturing us for years now telling us how life on earth was started "4 BILLION" years ago, (like they have a clue) and now they want to just change the rules all of a sudden?
those monkey worshiping assholes, they made there Atheist Darwin loving beds they can sleep in them.
Oh BTW.... Angel_luv did some research last month and found out not only was Jesus black he had a brother.
a lot of the time it's impossible to know. the species around that long ago are long gone, a lot of the time with no evidence of their existence.
evolution is always a branch off of an existing species. evolution is only successful when those branches grow. there are plenty of extremely ancient species that haven't evolved hardly at all over millions of years, such as alligators. this makes it easy to get confused by the idea and say "why the didn't they ever change?". species don't HAVE to evolve. if a compe ive enough animal is produced it can remain relatively purebred for eons.
the speculation of the egg not coming first is quite stupid in my opinion. any birds that the chicken evolved from could have the same exact eggs development protein, or another similar protein for the same job, in which case the "egg came before the chicken". The egg formation protein definitely came before the egg, but that doesn't mean the chicken came before both, that makes no sense.
when evolution is mocked for suggesting chimpanzees and humans have a common ancestor, a lot of the time things are said like, "why are chimpanzees still around? why don't they give birth to humans?"
the answer is that, if true, chimpanzees and humans forked apart in to different branches a few hundred thousand years ago. humans and chimpanzees grew as individual branches for thousands of generations. this is why chimpanzees are still around, they are their own species. the reason they don't give birth to humans is because it took that many thousands of generations for humans to become humans, and chimpanzees to become chimpanzees. the only thing evolution suggests is that before that fork there's an ancient unknown monkey species that is the great granddaddy of all chimpanzees and humans.
Last edited by greyforest; 07-14-2010 at 04:35 PM.
Yea that is why you guys need to say "4 Billion" years ago when you talk about the age of the earth so you can use the excuse all the good evidence is long gone.
Why do you guys get a pass when it comes to changing the rules?
there's a lot of really good evidence that is found. the combination of fossil discovery and carbon dating gives us a lot of evidence. the problem is that fossils are RELATIVELY few and far between - you're finding maybe 0.0001% of the fossils of animals which existed that long ago.
check out carbon dating:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dating
WTF does it matter? We still don't know why the chicken crossed the road
You have any idea how long it takes for a fossil to be made?
Carbon dating has many flaws and many good debaters don't pull out the carbon dating card for that same reason. you want me to post were a whale washed ashore and they sent the bones to two different carbon dating labs and got two different dates and they were millions of years off?and carbon dating gives us a lot of evidence.
I would be careful not to use the carbon dating card unless your backed in a corner.
So if there is no fossil of a half ape half man why do you guys support Darwin so much?the problem is that fossils are RELATIVELY few and far between - you're finding maybe 0.0001% of the fossils of animals which existed that long ago.
ok i will as long as you check out carbon dating flaws and mistakes.check out carbon dating:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dating
http://www.factsplusfacts.com/carbon...rin-shroud.htm
http://www.innoval.com/C14/
well, aside from the fact that there are a handful, as soon as scientists started sequencing DNA of all the species it became pretty damn obvious.
Links/pics/quotes don't just sing it bring it. You want to prove evolution just have folks look at your avatar.
Yep, that's ST, the forum where mouse's intellect spans greater than that of any scientist because they believe in evolution.
You realize no one said humans evolved from apes, hence why there are still apes around, but evolved from a common ancestor, right?
Evolution cannot be disputed. And if you try to then you're just so blindly following religion to fufuil your life that I am sad for you.
C'mon folks . . . the answer is simple. Which came first? The Rooster came first!
Yep, that's ST, the forum where mouse's intellect spans greater than that of any scientist because they believe in evolution.
You realize no one said humans evolved from apes, hence why there are still apes around, but evolved from a common ancestor, right?
Evolution cannot be disputed. And if you try to then you're just so blindly following religion to fufuil your life that I am sad for you.
C'mon folks . . . the answer is simple. Which came first? The Rooster came first!
Are you serious?
this didn't get the credit it deserved
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
