for me lion its nothing to tiger, the true king of jungle
There's joke in my country that when your kids ask which Animal is the strongest and then the father will say: "Son! Lion was the King of Beasts...until your mother came".
So yeah, Humans, the unstoppable killing machines, are the strongest.
Unstoppable is the key word - we could never outrun a gazelle on the plains, but we just keep chasing them forever until they just can't keep going; they can't keep up the pace. Humanity is literally the Terminator of the animal kingdom.
I would probably legitimately give Akatsuki's answer if someone asked me this. Lions! Can't beat em.
I remember reading something about this in a book once: Circus types in the western US used to set up lion-vs.-bear fights as part of their shows, back in the 19th century (before animal cruelty laws). The bears won virtually every time. Lions are powerful, but really pretty fragile, while bears are incredibly sturdy. The bears would just soak the alpha and then annihilate.
I remember reading something about this in a book once: Circus types in the western US used to set up lion-vs.-bear fights as part of their shows, back in the 19th century (before animal cruelty laws). The bears won virtually every time. Lions are powerful, but really pretty fragile, while bears are incredibly sturdy. The bears would just soak the alpha and then annihilate.
No surprise there. Lions evolved as agile ambush predators while bears evolved to hold their ground, especially if their ground happens to be rich fishing grounds or has an abundance of food. Bears have much better resilience and endurance and therefore has a much better chance at surviving a head on toe-to-toe fight.
I like Hibiki's answer. As per Comrade Stalin, "Quantity has a quality all its own." While humans have had the most dramatic impact on the shape of the planet, we're not the only creatures to colonize the world, and we're far more rare than many insects.
Ants, for example, are super-adaptable to the point where there's one species that has had one immediate family of queens transplanted to every continent. There are more of those ants in that one family than humans in the world.
Domestic cats are similarly well-adapted, there even are domestic cats living in Antarctica, thanks to explorers having a few escape into the wilds. They live by poaching from the other animals.
Mincemaker said:
No surprise there. Lions evolved as agile ambush predators while bears evolved to hold their ground, especially if their ground happens to be rich fishing grounds or has an abundance of food. Bears have much better resilience and endurance and therefore has a much better chance at surviving a head on toe-to-toe fight.
There was also a piece on something like Discovery Channel I saw once, after the channel had started really going downhill, where they talked about whether a lion or crocodile would win in a head-on fight. The answer was basically "crocodile, because a lion really can't kill a crocodile (can't pierce the hide with its claws, and its neck is too difficult to land a solid bite upon,) while crocodiles can, and do, kill lions if they can ambush them at a watering hole.
You guys would have no hope of convincing 9-year old me (or, probably, Akatsuki) that big cats aren't the most awesomest things ever. I had stuffed animals and everything. So checkmate, discovery channel and circus dudes.
You guys would have no hope of convincing 9-year old me (or, probably, Akatsuki) that big cats aren't the most awesomest things ever. I had stuffed animals and everything. So checkmate, discovery channel and circus dudes.
Isn't that just "LALALA I'M NOT LISTENING"? I mean, you can replace "big cats" with literally anything you can find in toy form.
By that measure, trains are the strongest animals of all, because I was really into wooden train sets when I was about 5 years old, so checkmate, big cats! (Although by the time I was 9, I guess it was Ninja Turtles, so Raphael is the strongest animal?)
Isn't that just "LALALA I'M NOT LISTENING"? I mean, you can replace "big cats" with literally anything you can find in toy form.
By that measure, trains are the strongest animals of all, because I was really into wooden train sets when I was about 5 years old, so checkmate, big cats! (Although by the time I was 9, I guess it was Ninja Turtles, so Raphael is the strongest animal?)
Well, humans can adapt and develop some antibodies and immunity against them if given some time.
So yeah, Humans, the unstoppable killing machines, are the strongest.
Naw it's roaches.
Once humanity kills itself off with nuclear weapons roaches will be the most likely to survive.
The meek shall inherit the earth and all that jazz.
zgryphon said:
I remember reading something about this in a book once: Circus types in the western US used to set up lion-vs.-bear fights as part of their shows
NWSiaCB said:
There was also a piece on something like Discovery Channel I saw once, after the channel had started really going downhill, where they talked about whether a lion or crocodile would win in a head-on fight.
You see the problem with that is the same with the ol' croc vs shark fight.
The croc technically wins because it can survive in more diverse biomes. Put a croc on land and it's ok, put a shark on land and it's dead in a few hours.
Lions and cats in general can adapt to more habitats than crocs and bears. The bear being slow and sturdy couldn't make kills in places that demands stealth or speed and the croc wouldn't do well in extremely cold or dry places.
Once humanity kills itself off with nuclear weapons roaches will be the most likely to survive.
The meek shall inherit the earth and all that jazz.
Cockroaches are, surprisingly, not incredibly resistant to radiation. While certainly much higher than a humans (but then again, the LD50 for most animals in general is higher than for a human) both fruit flies and bracionidae are orders of magnitude higher than the humble cockroach. Even shellfish are almost 5 times as resistant.
Cockroaches are, surprisingly, not incredibly resistant to radiation. While certainly much higher than a humans (but then again, the LD50 for most animals in general is higher than for a human) both fruit flies and bracionidae are orders of magnitude higher than the humble cockroach. Even shellfish are almost 5 times as resistant.
Yeah, but I'm sure you get what I'm trying to say. All the power, tools and strength of a creature is meaningless if they use it to kill themselves.
Lions and cats in general can adapt to more habitats than crocs and bears. The bear being slow and sturdy couldn't make kills in places that demands stealth or speed and the croc wouldn't do well in extremely cold or dry places.
I like Hibiki's answer. As per Comrade Stalin, "Quantity has a quality all its own." While humans have had the most dramatic impact on the shape of the planet, we're not the only creatures to colonize the world, and we're far more rare than many insects.
Ants, for example, are super-adaptable to the point where there's one species that has had one immediate family of queens transplanted to every continent. There are more of those ants in that one family than humans in the world.
Domestic cats are similarly well-adapted, there even are domestic cats living in Antarctica, thanks to explorers having a few escape into the wilds. They live by poaching from the other animals.
There was also a piece on something like Discovery Channel I saw once, after the channel had started really going downhill, where they talked about whether a lion or crocodile would win in a head-on fight. The answer was basically "crocodile, because a lion really can't kill a crocodile (can't pierce the hide with its claws, and its neck is too difficult to land a solid bite upon,) while crocodiles can, and do, kill lions if they can ambush them at a watering hole.
Yep. Crocs can tank all the things a lion can throw at them. They have splint-mail built into their skin and all.
Hippos, though, are ones that crocs don't wanna deal with. Ever seen a croc get bitten in half by a hippo?
Hippos are a different story overall with their massive friggin jaws. I remembered watching a footage from Animal Planet that a few crocs back off in the presence of a hippo, they know shit's getting real.
Well, humans can adapt and develop some antibodies and immunity against them if given some time.
So yeah, Humans, the unstoppable killing machines, are the strongest.
*rewind* No, the bacterium or virus still wins due to its reproductive cycle being vastly shorter and more simple than that of humans. As such they can undergo thousands of generations of evolution in an exceptionally short time so while drugs and antibodies will work for a while there will be more and more survivors passing on their immunity. Oh and it's recently been discovered that some types of bacteria can pass their immunity to other types, how's that for cross species teamwork?
I also like the fact that virulent types 'vote' on the exact time to start dicking you over too. It's quite simple, just the passing of chemicals to one another and when a threshold of bacteria with this chemical attached to a receptor (causing the emission of a different chemical) is reached they all activate their virulence. Bacterial communication (language?) AND perfect democracy. We're doomed.
I also like the fact that virulent types 'vote' on the exact time to start dicking you over too. It's quite simple, just the passing of chemicals to one another and when a threshold of bacteria with this chemical attached to a receptor (causing the emission of a different chemical) is reached they all activate their virulence. Bacterial communication (language?) AND perfect democracy. We're doomed.
Not "doomed", exactly.
Bacteria and virii don't want to kill their host for the same reason other parasites want to live off a host for as long as possible.
Part of that evolution has caused bacteria to be less virulent over time. Diseases like the various forms of pox, cholera, chlamydia, herpes, etc. were all nearly always fatal a thousand or so years ago. Now, several of them, like chicken pox, are mere nuisance diseases. It's not that humans became stronger, the diseases just learned to pull their punches to keep from killing us, because humans that recover will breed more humans that can be infected. A bubonic plague can die out if it spreads fast enough and kills enough people to ensure herd immunity.
Of all the animals that kill other animals, humans are one of exactly two species that ever do so for fun. The other species is the house cat, and unlike humans they don't kill members of their own species for fun.
Of all the animals that kill other animals, humans are one of exactly two species that ever do so for fun. The other species is the house cat, and unlike humans they don't kill members of their own species for fun.
That's not true. I know I've seen reports of dolphins killing other dolphins for fun. (And especially porpoises, although you can kinda-sorta say that's for survival in the sense that they are killing off competitors for their food.) (Also, dolphins will have sex for pleasure, as well, as I remember seeing a nature documentary where a male dolphin had incestuous sex with his sister and podmate just after she had given birth, because hey, incest is fun, but you don't want any pregnancies from that. He then went on to suckle from her, because lactation is fun, too.)
Chimps and some other primates can also kill one another for complex social reasons that may just well have some certain degree of sadism mixed in.
For that matter, you can also throw in creatures like praying mantises and spiders like the black widow spider, which, contrary to myth, don't necessarily kill their mates after mating is complete - they just automatically kill anything that comes near them unless they are approached with an "I'm here to mate" dance, tapping, or pheremone, and if that wears off before the male can mate, then escape, they'll be eaten... and some females are quicker to forget than others.
You're ascribing motives animals that don't communicate such, and so it basically can just become a list of all the animals intelligent enough to actually act on anything remotely like a desire for fun versus a purely instinctual behavior guided solely by Darwinian concerns of propagation. It really brings down the quasi-moralistic point you're trying to make when you try to say that, because humans are among the only animals complex enough to have a system of behavior devised by their own intelligence, rather than pure instinct, they are the only species that fails to universally abide by the moral code they devised for themselves.
Water bears, right?Huh? Humans are weak against bacteria and other microbes, you say?They can kill any beast just fine with guns. And for critters with tough hides or shells they could just use poison.Humans nanodesu.Meh, just wear a Hazmat suit then and flamethrower everything into a fine scattered ash. Nanodesu.Graaahh!Considering their resistance to extreme temperatures and environmental adaptability.Dinosaurs, yeah!
Dinosaurs!Surely it must be the King of Beasts — the lion, no?
