I've always found this question really easy, every chicken has "been" an egg, and the first chicken egg was laid by something that was not an chicken but fairly close.

Those who believe in evolution believe that dinosaurs evolved into chickens. However, evolution has not been proven. I still believe that God put the first chickens on the Earth as adults.

No. Look at modern dogbreeds, all of which wouldn't exist withou human intervention. Look at mules. Look at corn.

Either way, you're trying to disprove a mountain of evidence through one little issue. I'm sure if 
you actually wanted to find out more about chicken evolution, I'm sure you could. In fact, I'd do it myself, but I have a feeling thats you'd try and disporve that evidence one way or another, leading to a circular argument that gets nothing done.

@ a.l.e.x59 - The bible version of creation has no evidence and has not been proven.

Most people who argue over evolution is don't even know what evolution is.  The concept itself is among the most illuminating idea of all time, but just like fanboys, creationists don't bother to fully understand what the other side has to say.

Evolution, the process itself, is fact.  Even the Vatican acknowledged it about 10 years ago.  What's contentious, is whether human is a product of evolution.  

Most people arguing against "evolution" don't even know enough about evolution to take that position.  In fact, all authors who I have read about who argue against evolution, and these authors include big name physicsts and professors, get their logic wrong and usually end up implicitly assuming what they try to go out and prove in the first place.

There is no answer to the "question" chicken or the egg.  It is a thought exercise.  The question as it stands is too ill-defined to warrant an answer--it's cyclical.  Of course you can have a discussion about it, which is fun I guess for the first few goarounds.

damnit, if you guys want to be all technical and sh!t weezy was came first . I MADE THE CHICKEN AND EGG@!!!

Miyamoto came first.

my dad came first and my mom was upset.

A winner is you!

It's only illuminating if it's true; otherwise it's just an interesting idea. And it's rather presumptuous to say that creationists "don't bother" to understand. On the other hand, there have been many cases where evolutionists/atheists really begin to take their search for understanding seriously, and end up adopting creationism after discovering that there's no avoiding the evidence. And we're talking people who really, really don't want to believe creationism is true here.

Nothing in science is fact; science, just like any physical evidence, "suggests," never proves. Also, what the Vatican says (except for the Catholic among us) is not very important to the argument from a logical standpoint.

Why does the process of evolution seem so aware of itself, as if it were an entity? Evolutionists want us to believe that biology somehow simply "knows" that hey, claws would really help me out in this situation; I'll gradually pass them on to my offspring's offspring's offspring... or being able to blend in with my surroundings is a better defensive mechanism for me than a shell at this point, so lets gradually pick that skill up. Seems like we're attributing decision-making skills to a thoughtless process, where they would seem much more befitting a God-like figure who determined what each animal would have in advance. That's just one little thought that occurs... I'll save the others for a rainy day.

But really, just look at the insane level of intricacy and variety in animals and our world in general, and then try to explain how you can justify the idea that it's more reasonable than anything else that it all resulted from some pool of freakin' soup.

And the chicken came first. Eggs need their mother's warmth to hatch, so the first egg would need to come from a mother (that's how I see it).

*applause* superchunk, you are the weener!