BL> Don't be silly, Frank. The chicken-and-egg question is a joke
 BL> with no answer. It's only twits like Paul who take it
 BL> seriously.

 RG> Depends whether you're a creationalist or an evolutionist
 RG> doesn't it? A creationalist will accept that the chicken came
 RG> first - an evolutionist really needs an answer otherwise
 RG> evolution doesn't make a great deal of sense.

  The only mystery is caused by the two words themselves, where it is
assumed that one always leads to the other. If you substitute other
words for "chicken" and "egg" you see what you have...
nothing of any
value or deep meaning.

  What came first, the animal that reproduced or the method it used to
reproduce? Stupid.. eh?

  I can tell you what did *not* come first: an old man with a spare
week and a beard, creating the Universe.

Regards,
Bob
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12
@EOT:

---