The Chicken Came First

All truthful knowledge can be seen as one great whole of knowledge.

And after all, since we’re talking about creating worlds and such, ya gotta learn it sometime, right?  I mean really, do you think you’ll be ready to create worlds if you’re not sure which comes first, the chicken or the egg?  It’s like learning to get dressed but you can’t remember which comes first…shoes or socks.

But enough about my morning…


If one prescribes to a premise of creation in which God says “Let there be chicken” and then ::poof:: (or other relevant creation sound effect…that’ll take some fasting and praying to figure out the true nature of that sound) a chicken is created, then which came first? The chicken or the egg?

In this case it would be the:


The chicken!

Ok, that was easy, so let’s get on with a more worldly approach.


As described by different observers and scientists over the years, including Charles Darwin, the concept is that an organism, species, life-form will:

  1. have a certain type of traits
  2. these traits pass from generation to generation
  3. at some point, the traits may mutate
  4. the life-forms that have traits that are advantageous will be better able to survive
  5. the life-forms without the advantageous traits (or receive a disadvantageous trait) will not be able to survive

Gary Larsen explains evolution combined with caffeine…er…hot chocolate

As a result, such a being will evolve into better and better forms, slowly, over generations.

A mouse:

So let’s run through this example in detail.

  1. A mouse has certain traits…small, quick, tasty to cats, whiskers, ears, tail, and thinks about opera music all day (I’m pretty sure on the opera music thing…at least it hasn’t been disproven yet)
  2. From one generation of mouse to the next (which is like 2 months for a mouse), the mouse children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren…will pretty much have these types of traits.
  3. During each generation over a long-long time, at some point, a mouse is born with a negative trait. ..this mouse also has the trait of smelling very strongly of cat nip and has bright orange fur that glows in the dark. Well…sorry to say, this mouse won’t last very long as the cats will find him right away.  So with that special mouse quickly eaten, then that mouse is not around to have offspring…which is probably good as that mouse’s children might get the orange-glowy-fur and cat-nip smell.
    (3 again) But suppose over many, many generations, a mouse is born that can deliver an electric shock (like an eel), then this might be a positive trait for the mouse to defend against cats. Any time a cat gets close, then this TASER-mouse zaps the cat, then grabs the cheese, and goes on his merry way humming opera music.
  4. So this super-TASER-mouse has children, but not all the children get the TASER ability, but others do. First off, the cats may not eat the non-TASER children-mice as the siblings will TASE their non-electric brothers and sisters, right?

Ok, who didn’t expect this pic?

  1. From generation to generation, the cats can’t eat the TASER mice, so they simply go after the non-electric mice. But at some point, the non-electric mice all die off (get eaten), leaving just the super-TASER mice around.

The mice have…evolved!

Back to Chicken

We like chicken better anyway, besides, who ever heard of KFM…no!  KFC it is!

So let’s look at the egg.

  • If we see an egg, we call it a snake’s egg because it came from a…snake.
  • A goose egg came from a goose.
  • An ostrich egg comes from an ostrich
  • And a chicken egg comes from a chicken.

Now let’s look at the evolvement of the chicken in the concept of evolution.

  • First organisms were cells in the sea.
  • Followed by more complex cell structures, then cells that specialized in different functions.
  • From smaller cell-animals, to full-fledged prehistoric fish.
  • Then some fish evolved enough to have some legs and crawled out of the water…but they died as they didn’t have lungs to breath air.
  • But at some point, some fish grew some legs and lungs, and was able to crawl and be on land.
  • Then came feathers.
  • Then came an appreciation for opera music.
  • Then one mutation to the next over many, many generations.

But we don’t have a chicken yet.  We have a pre-pre-pre-mutation chicken.  The animal we’re looking at doesn’t yet have the attributes of a chicken.

This pre-pre-pre-chicken lays an egg, but it’s not a chicken’s egg.  It’s a pre-pre-pre-chicken’s egg.  The egg is defined by the parent that laid it, not what mutant comes out of it.

After  a mutation, we get the pre-pre-chicken…it lays a pre-pre-chicken egg. (and if scientists were hip, this would be known as the doubpre).

Over many more generations, we get the pre-chicken animal.  This still isn’t a chicken.  It’s the animal before the chicken.  And it lays a pre-chicken egg.

Then…finally, out of one of these pre-chicken egg’s we get a new mutant…the chicken!  Only after that chicken grows up and lays a chicken egg do we get the actual…er…chicken egg.

Go forth and create likewise now

And there it is, even on the evolution side, the chicken came first.

And is there a place that God did the ::poof:: version to create a chicken?  Or did God make use of evolution to create the chicken (and some other things).

Ok, now you’re all set, you have the first step of knowledge of creating worlds.



Age differences in dating for LDS singles

First, we’re not talking about any dating of ages of youngin’s on here.  Or anything having to do with younger people who may not be fully up to making such adult decisions yet.  And we’re also not talking about exploitation of such.  We’re talking about say…a 30 year old dating a 50 year old.  Or something along those lines.

LDS theology follows that the truth has been restored.  The answer of life the universe and everything is being revealed through modern day prophets.  Why just the other week in priesthood meeting, the teacher even revealed that such an answer was in fact “42.”  True, the teacher was me, but he did recite scripture from the First Book of Douglas Adams about it, so it must be legit.

One of the topics in the world is the May-December or the December-May relationships that occur in our culture. In the 21st century, this may not be as common of a phenomenon as it was in say, the 19th century, but it’s still a great topic for discussion.

Hollywood gives multiple examples:

  • Jeff Goldblum (62 ) and Emilie Livingston (31)
  • Ellen Barkin (57) and Sam Levinson (26)
  • Kelsey Grammar (up there) and everybody (down there)

There’s more, Michael Douglas, Al Pacino, Cher, the list goes on.

But what about within the LDS culture in which the view on marriage trandscends this world.  The concept that we lived as spirits before coming here to this Earth and continuing on to live resurrected and even married together after death? Is there something in the bishop’s handbook on that?  A conference talk?  A primary lesson?  What’s the magic number?  (other than 42)  Is it really half-your-age-plus-7? That would include Scarlett Johansson for me.

What will the neighbors think?

Some months ago, a friend was visiting. Yes, a lady friend, and an adult.  But, no, not that kind of lady friend.  But she’s also young, like younger than Scarlet Johansson…er…half my age.  We were joking around about what if she came to church with me and kinda hung on my arm, sat close in sacrament meeting, grabbed my hand, the whole scene, right?  Oh, I love my ward dearly, they’re a wonderful bunch.  But no doubt that night in the hundred plus households there’d be a discussion on what’s-he-doing-with-that-younger-lady.  I’d get needled by the FFB’s (fun friendly bretheren) in the ward for…well…probably months.


If it’s all eternal anyway, what’s the deal with the age thing?

Personally, I do have an aversion to dating too far off my age range.  Though I’ve dated a number of years younger (11ish difference in years) and a number of years older (8), those numbers haven’t bothered me at my…well…advancing (ahem) age.  But still, the idea of dating someone half my age or dating a lady a dozen years older, pushes my social sensibilities.  Whether this comes from growing up in our society and going with the flow or from somewhere else, I do share this idea.  But why?

Aren’t we all the same age in the next life…kinda?  Is age in this life “just a number?”

And we do have age-defined activities from young-single-adults, single-adults, mid-singles.  So there’s some sort of thought going in there somewhere.  Perhaps the age is not “just a number.”

And what about the gender differences on ages?

  • Males prefer younger, same age, or slightly older
  • Females prefer slightly…well..same age, or older
  • Surveys say that 75% of couples in the US are the same age (33%) or the husband is slightly older.

Common goals at the time

One thing I’ve noticed is that I relate easier to people that are in some of the same phases as me in life.  Raising children of roughly similar ages seems to be a big part of it, which makes sense as raising children is a…well…big part.

At one time, I didn’t have any children.  Another time, I had diapers around the house ready to be used at a moment’s notice.  Now the kids have their noses in their smartphones all day long.  Going back a phase or two sounds….odd…to me.  But it’s done.  Remember Michael Douglas?  He’s way (way) older than me, yet his youngest is younger than my youngest.

Back to eternal again

But take the single adults and midsingles thing.  Many times these are people that have older children and aren’t going back to a diaper phase (other than…heh…later in life. Sure, we laugh now!).  But still, the concept of dating within some age range of oneself is there, just not exactly written down.

I’m still not certain on the concept of how choosing in this lifetime roughly around one’s age is the way to go in the eyes of the Lord.  Then again, it’s not a burning question that I’m faced with as the lady I’ve seen most recently has a whopping difference from my age of 15…months!  15 months!  Not years.

(yeah, she totally doesn’t know she was mentioned in a post, so keep that under your hat. Plus she writes gooder better than me and I’d end up in her writings doing who knows what)


Could it be that the wide differences may make for different phases of life and the two people simply wouldn’t relate to each other that well?  Does it make for higher odds that one person may pass away much earlier than the other making for decades of the surviving spouse looking to remarry (bringing up possible sealing questions)?

Is it just easier to stick to the semi-near age groups?

And contrary to popular reports, if a mid-single shows up at a YSA activity flashing a printout of my article, it does not (repeat, does not) automatically get you into the activity.