Are you kidding me with all these tweets about the “age-old question” about the chicken and egg finally being answered?
First off, it’s a stupid children’s riddle and the answer to it is “that which did not come last.” Ok?
Second, even if you don’t want to think of it as a simple riddle and insist on it meaning more than that – kinda like those people who insist that Plato wasn’t just making a point – you can think of it insead as a rhetorical question meant to emphasize the uncertainty of our origins. Am I dreaming or am I someone else’s dream? That sort of thing. So, no, no one expects that sort of thing to literally have an answer.
And finally, if that isn’t enough for you, consider this.
The so-called proof consists of the discovery of ovocleidin-17. You can also refer to it as OC-17. Anyway, OC-17 is essential in the formation of eggshells and is (logically enough) found in chicken ovaries. The argument goes that because OC-17 is found in the knocked up hen and is necessary for the formation of an egg, an egg could not have been formed unless there was a chicken ovary that could have provided the OC-17. Voila! The chicken came before the egg.
The problem is that the research doesn’t actually prove any of that. As it turns out, ovocleidin isn’t the only protein that acts as a catalyst for cell-production. Struthiocleidin does it for ostriches, for instance, and ansocalcin for geese. I guess the basic idea is that OC-17 isn’t unique in its ability to build eggs; that other proteins can be used to form the shells.
This being the case, it can’t be said that OC-17 proves that no other eggs were formed prior to the creation of chickens. The discovery of OC-17, in other words, only proves that it is the one responsible for the creation of eggs NOW, not that it the originator of chicken eggs.