Well, it looks like that age-old question that has been plaguing philosophers, scientists, and bored kids for centuries has finally been "answered." Or has it?
A recent study out of the University of Bristol's School of Earth Sciences claims to have cracked the case on what came first: chicken or the egg. But before we start celebrating this supposed breakthrough, let's take a closer look at what they're actually saying.
First of all, I have to hand it to these scientists. Considering 51 fossil species and 29 living species, the amount of old bones and critters would be enough to keep them busy.
The animals were divided into two categories: those that lay eggs (oviparous) and those that give birth to live young (viviparous). Now, I am no scientist, but last I checked, it was my understanding that chickens lay eggs. What on earth does that have to do with live birth?
In this work, viviparous-an early reptilian ancestor of the chicken that gives birth to live young is suggested. Okay, that's all very interesting, but isn't this creature that lived millions of years ago? How does this apply to the modern-day chicken-egg debate? It feels like we're comparing apples to dinosaurs here.
Now, I do admire the science involved, Still, sometimes I feel it is simply research looking for funding and cover stories that carry researchers' names into the headlines. "Scientists solve age-old mystery!" reads a tad more inspiring than "Scientists make educated guess about prehistoric reptile reproduction."
But for the sake of argument, let's indulge them a little.
The researchers quickly implied that live birth was easier on these prehistoric animals than laying eggs. Yeah, sure; I can swallow that. In a world replete with predators and other harsh environments, it probably kept the young takers longer, increasing their chances of survival. Again, how does this equate to today's chickens?
These scientists throw around such buzzwords as "extended embryo retention" and "amniotic egg," but those catchy phrases most definitely do little to answer the question all of us have been asking. It is as if they are tap dancing around the issue, giving us a history lesson instead of just the facts.
Meanwhile, Professor Michael Benton is quoted as saying, "We can finally consign the classic 'reptile egg' model to the wastebasket." Wait a minute, now: after one study, we're meant to throw away several decades of mainstays in science? That's a bit hasty, isn't it? Certainly, science is built upon earlier knowledge and not discarded every single time something new leads someone to another theory.
But according to Professor Baoyu Jiang, some lizards and snakes can do both eggs on certain occasions and give birth to live young on others.
Now, that is cool!
This suggests that nature is far more flexible and adaptable than perhaps we give it credit for. But how does this translate into chickens? Last I checked, hens weren't suddenly giving birth to a fluffy little chick instead of laying an egg.
After all this scientific mumbo-jumbo and prehistoric speculation, what's the conclusion?
The article speculates that, after all, the chicken came first. But seriously, the waters seem murkier than before we began. We started with a simple question about chickens and eggs and somehow ended up discussing ancient reptiles and flexible reproductive strategies.
I think this raises more questions than it answers. It is an interesting piece of research, but it seems out of place from the original debate. The chicken-or-egg question has always been a paradox on origin: how exactly would a chicken ever come without an egg, or vice versa, an egg without the chicken that lays it? Yet, this study makes no great address to the philosophical conundrum at hand.
Also, it is a bit presumptuous on their part to say they have "finally discovered" the answer. Science is one of those ongoing processes, and what appears as if a breakthrough today may be disproven tomorrow. Remember how Pluto was once considered a planet? Yeah, things change. I hear it's back to planet status, let me know in the comment section if that's changed again.
In the end, this is science by press release, as opposed to the finding of an answer, per se. Good enough, I suppose, for an interesting contribution to our understanding of the evolution of animals, but where the chicken-egg debate is concerned, I am not convinced. It feels like the same old coop we scratch around in for answers, some of which might not exist to begin with.