Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Super-predatory humans


Still Waters

Recommended Posts

Predators have roamed the planet for 500 million years. The earliest is thought to be some type of simple marine organism, a flatworm maybe or type of crustacean, perhaps a giant shrimp that feasted on ancient trilobites. Much later came the famous predatory dinosaurs such as T. rex, and later still large toothed mammals such as sabre toothed cats or modern wolves.

But one or two hundred thousand years ago, the world’s most powerful predator arrived.

Us.

We lacked big teeth or sharp claws, huge tentacles or venomous bites. But we had intelligence, and the guile to produce tools and artificial weapons. And as we became ever better hunters we started harvesting animals on a great scale.

arrow3.gifRead more...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
  • Replies 21
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • reggie2011

    2

  • karmakazi

    2

  • Junior Chubb

    2

  • fred_mc

    1

I think that other creatures do adapt to us, we're just too smart to really notice.

Example: Fish evolve to be smaller in order to slip through fishing nets. Human reaction: Make the holes in the net smaller. A completely forgettable alteration.

And, wait, wasn't there an article a few months back about how adult male elephants have started to lack tusks at all or at least have smaller ones? Would that not be an adaptation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would make sense as an adaptation, it would be a human-influenced natural selection. As humans are killing more of the elephants with big tusks and overlooking those who do not have tusks or have smaller ones, it is the two latter types who can do more breeding in their lifetimes and thus increase the percentage of the population that has small or no tusks.

Same with the fish, we limited the ability of larger fish to breed increasing the number of smaller fish in the population.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would make sense as an adaptation, it would be a human-influenced natural selection.

Absolutely right - human-influenced natural selection...

Seems all animals will be destroyed by humans completely someday and will there be new species evolving or nothing ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely right - human-influenced natural selection...

Seems all animals will be destroyed by humans completely someday and will there be new species evolving or nothing ?

That's why we have endangered species lists, hunting seasons and limits on how many we hunt, to prevent that from happening. I do believe also that animals evolving because of human influence to gain am advantage

Edited by phatmanxxl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only evolutionary strategy that has really worked against man is a super-fast breeding rate, and almost all animals that breed extremely quickly are considered pests by humans. The most successful of these animals are able to live with humans. Rats and cockroaches are ubiquitous in modern cities, and mosquitoes have even proven deadly. Instead of these animals adapting to humans, we've had to adapt. We develop traps for rats, mosquito nets, and pesticides. But even then, the super-fast breeding rate of these animals allows them to adapt, with pesticide resistance developing in large populations of pest animals.

The old saying goes "the meek shall inherit the Earth." Well with how thoroughly humans have hunted large animals and how successful small pest animals have been, this old saying may one day be fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

edoits anmals already have the advantage over us in there own habitat wanna fight a lion or even the smallest creature can kill us were already the bottom of the food chain outside our element fools

Link to comment
Share on other sites

things dont adapt to over throw another species it dosn't work like that things evolve to get better at what it is they need to do.its that simple

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it would be quite beneficial for animals if they evolved their intelligence so that when a car comes along, the animal waits to cross the road until the car has passed rather than running out just in front of the car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Animals can never evolve to our level until they develope thumbs,so apart from monkeys etc we are top of the heap,until we are wiped out by cancer or some other disease so when we have gone,the planet has had lizards,and mammals,so maybe its the insects turn ? ants maybe ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

things dont adapt to over throw another species it dosn't work like that things evolve to get better at what it is they need to do.its that simple

True in concept.

Try using actual sentences next time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

For mankind natural selection has been slowed down because we have the ability through technology to circumvent it. We can make people more attractive through clothing, makeup, surgery, etc. We can keep alive those who would die young(without technology & medicine), who then are able to have children, passing on their potentially harmful genes. We can stop some diseases from selecting out those of us who would normally be killed by them. We can even keep people safe or heal them from severe injuries who were perhaps not intelligent enough to avoid the injuries. Because mating is largly based on looks or money rather than other positive attributes such as intelligence, longevity, health, etc, we are selecting against the positive qualities and for potentially damaging qualities hidden beneath an attractive veneer. Attractiveness is now something which is influenced by media and society rather than by our instincts. What was based heavily on a person's scent is now based on what they smell like after bathing and wearing perfume or cologne, effectively masking "bad genes". Thanks to contacts, we don't even know who has good vision or bad vision unless they let us know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don think that will ever happen. Unless nature permits them to having bullet vests. If not for humans becoming more civilised, animals still would have been hunted to extinction...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do these animals really need to evolve a defence system to survive against humans?

What might ultimately ensure survival is being something humans need. I think if animal extinction increases at a rate that some predict, being a chicken will give you a better chance of survival than a tiger. We eat chicken and we will ensure its survival with us. They may be genetically mutated, short lived, unhappy and overweight but they will still be with us after many species will be gone. However once an animal is on this path its evolution is already controlled by humans.

So if you can't evolve to escape and survive, evolve to be needed. If you cant beat us, join us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or feed us. Entertain us. Basically, make yourself valuable to us.

Exactly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

arent there already "signs" of "forced" evolution out there? well maybe not evolution but still, some animals like Elephants dont grow horns anymore because of us, well really its not that they dont grow them, rather that the males with smaller horns are the ones left to mate now and so their offspring are born with smaller or no horns at all, earth in the end will abide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just think of what we are giving a chance to survive and strengthen... Rats, roaches, parasites, bacteria, viruses. They will become the super predator and kill us off. We already have super bugs that our antibiotics can't fight, we are having to make stronger and stronger medications to combat these things. We never know how these bigger species being killed off affect the molds and fungus that these medications are made of. We are setting the whole ecosystem off balance, well really into a new balance... a balance where things very dangerous to us may end up thriving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True in concept.

Try using actual sentences next time.

Grammer Police?

Odie :whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

things dont adapt to over throw another species it dosn't work like that things evolve to get better at what it is they need to do.its that simple

The evolutionary arms race or the "Red Queen's Hypothesis". :tu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.