Vegetarians versus Carnivores.

Karl Stein

Elephants. What animal, carnivore or not, would take on a healthy Elephant in a fight? An Elephant would pick up a lion with its trunk, throw it 500 meters, then sprint after it and jump up and down on its head just for fun.

So with the above synopsis of the animal kingdom being undeniable - who could pretend vegetablarians are inferior to carnivores?

Talk to me.

Dr Turk Turkelton

If God didn't want us to eat meat he wouldn't have made it so tasty.

Quality

I have made grown men cry. Without laying a finger on them.

My strength from with in

Winner!

Karl Stein

Cuchulainn1. wrote: »

If God didn't want us to eat meat he wouldn't have made it so tasty.

Except that any meat you can think of is, more often than not, accompanied by sauces made from spices, fruits and vegetables.

Topper Harley

I'll only eat things that once had a face and possibly a conscience.

Jaxxy

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

Elephants. What animal, carnivore or not, would take on a healthy Elephant in a fight? An Elephant would pick up a lion with its trunk, throw it 500 meters, then sprint after it and jump up and down on its head just for fun.

So with the above synopsis of the animal kingdom being undeniable - who could pretend vegetablarians are inferior to carnivores?

Talk to me.

Elephant vs Orca.

Ihatecuddles-old

Quality wrote: »

I have made grown men cry. Without laying a finger on them.

My strength from with in

Winner!

Winner winner chicken dinner?

kneemos

Jaxxy wrote: »

Elephant vs Orca.

Elephant versus mouse.

Jaxxy

kneemos wrote: »

Elephant versus mouse.

Aren't mice omnivores? :P

Karl Stein

Topper Harley wrote: »

I'll only eat things that once had a face and possibly a conscience.

Potatoes have eyes.

kneemos

Jaxxy wrote: »

Aren't mice omnivores? :P

Can't be an omnivore unless it's a carnivore.

Dr Turk Turkelton

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

Except that any meat you can think of is, more often than not, accompanied by sauces made from spices, fruits and vegetables.

aka the crap you push out of the way to get at the good stuff ie a nice rare steak!

Topper Harley

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

Potatoes have eyes.

Mmmm! Now mash that up and give it to me with some dead cooked animal.

ScumLord

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

Elephants. What animal, carnivore or not, would take on a healthy Elephant in a fight?

Us. They'll get the same thing their cousins the mammoths got if their not quite.

Karl Stein

Cuchulainn1. wrote: »

aka the crap you push out of the way to get at the good stuff ie a nice rare steak!

You do know that an Elephant would smash you to get at the grass that fed your steak?

Do you think you could beat an Elephant in a fight?

Topper Harley

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

You do know that an Elephant would smash you to get at the grass that fed your steak?

But they can be very friendly too.

Dr Turk Turkelton

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

You do know that an Elephant would smash you to get at the grass that fed your steak?

Do you think you could beat an Elephant in a fight?

Very easily actually with my two pals-Smith&Wesson.
Dumb vegetarian turning up to a fight unarmed...

Karl Stein

ScumLord wrote: »

Us. They'll get the same thing their cousins the mammoths got if their not quite.

You can make glaciers retreat?

Also, the fact that humans can employ tools that can kill other animals does not make us superior. There is no evidence superior technology leads to better survivability.

None.

Karl Stein

Cuchulainn1. wrote: »

Smith&Wesson.

You're more likely to die from heart disease than ever fighting an animal.

kneemos

Vegetarians merely exist as food for smarter,stronger and fitter carnivores.

FanadMan

Little known fact about a vegetarian diet - it makes your farts and pooh smell terrible. The only thing that should do that is Guinness.

MadsL

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

Elephants. What animal, carnivore or not, would take on a healthy Elephant in a fight? An Elephant would pick up a lion with its trunk, throw it 500 meters, then sprint after it and jump up and down on its head just for fun.

So with the above synopsis of the animal kingdom being undeniable - who could pretend vegetablarians are inferior to carnivores?

Talk to me.

Elephants cannot jump.

Lions do eat elephants.

Eat your vegetables.

IvySlayer

Lions hunt elephants

Tigers have been known to kill Indian elephants, some tigers have been recorded jumping out at tigers to induce heart attacks.

But yeah, 1 vs 1 the strongest herbivores will crush carnivores.

Elephants, Rhinos, Hippos, Gorillas etc

Karl Stein

kneemos wrote: »

Vegetarians merely exist as food for smarter,stronger and fitter carnivores.

Stop talking bollocks. Carnivores exist because of vegetarians.

Karl Stein

MadsL wrote: »

Elephants cannot jump.

Lions do eat elephants.

Eat your vegetables.

Traps. Do you fall into traps all the time?

kc90

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

There is no evidence superior technology leads to better survivability.

What do you attribute our increasing life span to?

Karl Stein

kc90 wrote: »

What do you attribute our increasing life span to?

Increasing lifespan compared to what?

Us homo-sapiens have a long way to go before we can call ourselves superior to other creatures like jellyfish and and crocodiles if you want to bring longevity into it.

What has lifespan to do with anything if it's at the expense of the biosphere that sustains us?

Don't be such an arrogant human.

Optimalprimerib

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

You can make glaciers retreat?

Also, the fact that humans can employ tools that can kill other animals does not make us superior. There is no evidence superior technology leads to better survivability.

None.

A population of ~7 billon may tend to disagree

Arawn

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

Except that any meat you can think of is, more often than not, accompanied by sauces made from spices, fruits and vegetables.

I dont eat sauces or spices or any of that stuff. MY steaks do be delicious on there own

Cavehill Red

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

There is no evidence superior technology leads to better survivability.

None.

Has anyone told the Neanderthals that?

Arawn

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Has anyone told the Neanderthals that?

They kept hunting big game and didn't adapt. That was their problem. We didn't appear with guns.

kc90

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

Increasing lifespan compared to what?

Us homo-sapiens have a long way to go before we can call ourselves superior to other creatures like jellyfish and and crocodiles if you want to bring longevity into it.

What has lifespan to do with anything if it's at the expense of the biosphere that sustains us?

Don't be such an arrogant human.

Uhmm...ok. I didn't compare increasing lifespan to anything. Is there a reason you think I should have?
No one has mentioned superiority but yourself. You said technology hasn't improved survivability ie you brought longevity into it
I'm positive it has, exemplified by a general increase in the human life span.
Arrogance? Elaborate now.

MadsL

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

Traps. Do you fall into traps all the time?

One of us has eaten Elephant. Care to guess which one?

Do I win?

Rabies

Quality wrote: »

I have made grown men cry. Without laying a finger on them.

My strength from with in

Winner!

Your cooking can't be that bad, can it?

Cavehill Red

Arawn wrote: »

They kept hunting big game and didn't adapt. That was their problem. We didn't appear with guns.

And what were we eating? Oh yeah, big game. How didn't they adapt? They didn't have our superior technology is how. We didn't need guns. Spears and dogs did the job.

Gummy Panda

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

Elephants. What animal, carnivore or not, would take on a healthy Elephant in a fight? An Elephant would pick up a lion with its trunk, throw it 500 meters, then sprint after it and jump up and down on its head just for fun.

So with the above synopsis of the animal kingdom being undeniable - who could pretend vegetablarians are inferior to carnivores?

Talk to me.

Humans. Proven track record

Arawn

Cavehill Red wrote: »

And what were we eating? Oh yeah, big game. How didn't they adapt? They didn't have our superior technology is how. We didn't need guns. Spears and dogs did the job.

Actually humans at the start ran prey to death. Humans ate much smaller prey than neanderthalls. We started to eat rabbit while they continued to hunt big game whiich was rapidly disappearing.

Also do you really think neanderthal man didn't have spears??

Also it's been suggested that interbreeding had a lot to do with it, or the fact we may have brought germs and viruses with us when we settled europe, think small pox and native americans.

also they needed more food and required more energy to function, so with the massive climate change they would of been less able to adapt.

Shenshen

"Superior" vs. "inferior" animals?

Really?

Is that how poor your understanding of ecosystems and evolution really is?

Throw an elephant in a tank with a shark and see who comes out top.
There is no superior or inferior in nature, there simply are animals who are adapted to their niche in the ecosystem.

--Kaiser--

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

Elephants. What animal, carnivore or not, would take on a healthy Elephant in a fight? An Elephant would pick up a lion with its trunk, throw it 500 meters, then sprint after it and jump up and down on its head just for fun.

So with the above synopsis of the animal kingdom being undeniable - who could pretend vegetablarians are inferior to carnivores?

Talk to me.

I dunno if you're being serious or not, but elephants are killed by lions once the lions are in a large enough pride (20+). Humans (also pack animals) are also historic predators of elephants (not speaking of poaching BTW)

dodderangler

For every herbivore there is a carnivore to prey on them. Size means nothing on it. Hence why animals live in packs or herds.
A herd has safety in numbers and a pack animal have more a chance of getting a kill.

Geomy

Shenshen wrote: »

"Superior" vs. "inferior" animals?

Really?

Is that how poor your understanding of ecosystems and evolution really is?

Throw an elephant in a tank with a shark and see who comes out top.
There is no superior or inferior in nature, there simply are animals who are adapted to their niche in the ecosystem.

It all depends on what kind of shark you put in with the elephant.

And a tank isn't the shsrks natural environment, so I think the shark would be more wary than the elephant. ..

Anyway who's going to put a shark into a tank with an elephant ?

omahaid

Elephant vs the moon, who will win?

Geomy

The moon of course :-D

darced

This post has been deleted.

kneemos

omahaid wrote: »

Elephant vs the moon, who will win?

An elephant would trample the moon.

FatherLen

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

jump up and down on its head.

elephants can't jump.

Genghiz Cohen

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

Elephants. What animal, carnivore or not, would take on a healthy Elephant in a fight? An Elephant would pick up a lion with its trunk, throw it 500 meters, then sprint after it and jump up and down on its head just for fun.

So with the above synopsis of the animal kingdom being undeniable - who could pretend vegetablarians are inferior to carnivores?

Talk to me.

Man used to hunt Mammoths.

Elephants are like Mammoth's campy anaemic cousin.

mattjack

Shenshen wrote: »

"Superior" vs. "inferior" animals?

Really?

Is that how poor your understanding of ecosystems and evolution really is?

Throw an elephant in a tank with a shark and see who comes out top.
There is no superior or inferior in nature, there simply are animals who are adapted to their niche in the ecosystem.

Hmmm , I'd imagine the shark might drive the tank and the elephant would be the gunner/radio operator.

http://www.google.ie/imgres?q=elephant+tank&um=1&safe=off&sa=N&biw=800&bih=485&hl=en&tbm=isch&tbnid=9efOERdIOlkX5M:&imgrefurl=http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-95949286/stock-vector-german-ww-ferdinand-elephant-tank-destroyer.html&docid=_RT_iWjuTKcn1M&imgurl=http://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/819670/819670,1330074412,10/stock-vector-german-ww-ferdinand-elephant-tank-destroyer-95949286.jpg&w=450&h=339&ei=Z_cmUsyQNqid7QbM04GYBA&zoom=1&ved=1t:3588,r:39,s:0,i:215&iact=rc&page=6&tbnh=171&tbnw=221&start=38&ndsp=9&tx=200&ty=57

I give you the elephant tank.

Thank you , that is all.

Mr Benevolent

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

Elephants. What animal, carnivore or not, would take on a healthy Elephant in a fight? An Elephant would pick up a lion with its trunk, throw it 500 meters, then sprint after it and jump up and down on its head just for fun.

So with the above synopsis of the animal kingdom being undeniable - who could pretend vegetablarians are inferior to carnivores?

Talk to me.

Come on Chuck, we all know carnivores are better.

Ush1

As has been said, lions will often hunt an elephant. Particularly at night around water, where the elephants eyesight is very poor.

Wibbs

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

Also, the fact that humans can employ tools that can kill other animals does not make us superior. There is no evidence superior technology leads to better survivability.

Eh yea it does. We went from small fruit and nut eaters to typing on keyboards in space because of technology. We externalised and drove our own evolution and we're the only animal to have ever done that.

Arawn wrote: »

Actually humans at the start ran prey to death. Humans ate much smaller prey than neanderthalls. We started to eat rabbit while they continued to hunt big game whiich was rapidly disappearing.

Not quite. They lived in Eurasia for the guts of 300,000 years and no widespread large animal extinctions occurred. We show up and they do. Indeed you can nigh on trace our arrival in various parts of the world by following large animal extinctions. If Neandertals were running outa food, it would have been our doing. But they weren't for the most part. Plus they had wide ranging tastes in food too. At some periods more wide than us. They ate root veg, birds, shellfish, fish, even sea mammals. Hell they were processing wild grains and seeds into biscuits tens of thousands of years before any evidence we were. Yep Neandertals were eating biccies, not unlike those health bars so fash today. The shaggy haired man ape trudging dumbly through snow fields in pursuit of mammoths is a tiny and cliched part of their culture over 300,000 years.

Also do you really think neanderthal man didn't have spears??

And they had them before us too. Oldest spears so far found in the world belong to them and they're beautifully made throwing spears too and 100,000 years before the primitive versions of us modern humans show up.

Also it's been suggested that interbreeding had a lot to do with it, or the fact we may have brought germs and viruses with us when we settled europe,

Maybe but that can go both ways too. They seem to have had nuclear powered immune systems. A number of them found had horrible traumas that would fell an elephant yet they survived them. One guy lost an arm in his youth(may even have been purposely amputated to save him) and survived at least a decade after it. Imagine the infection risk there. Interestingly a couple of researchers are reckoning that the reason we have some of their genes still is because those genes gave an immune system boost to us.

think small pox and native americans.

Actually that's not nearly so cut and dried either. EG the Aztecs had a word for smallpox in their language before the Europeans arrived and Spanish descriptions of early outbreaks follow what you would expect of smallpox, but the later mass killer is different. Plus how would an introduced pathogen take 30 years before it's first outbreak, then take a further 50 years before really getting genocidal? Makes no sense. For a start those who had survived the first bout would have passed on some immunity. The pestilence that really decimated the population had a different and newer word. From the extensive descriptions by Spanish priests, and Phillip the 2nds personal doctor(sent by him to learn about native meds and therapies) the real killer wasn't smallpox, but some sort of local, non introduced hellish hemorrhagic fever.

also they needed more food and required more energy to function, so with the massive climate change they would of been less able to adapt.

They lived in Eurasia for 300,000 plus years. In that time they would have survived countless climate changes, both local and global, yet they survived all of that by adapting. The thing is if an alien was to land on earth say 100,000 years ago and asked the question which one of these humans would survive, it would have been a hard one to answer and they may well have chosen Neandertals.