Man vs Animals

[Feline-Owl]

Really doubt Humans would last. Humans are not even that impressive, compared to other animals. They still die, and are one of the most fragile species in the animal Kingdom. I can see Humans become extinct during an Armageddon. But animals? They wouldn't care. They'd move on, evolve, learn to adapt to the changes like they had to when people began sprouting buildings(animals already take advantage of that). And hey, they'd probably see an improvement with no more people hindering their mobility.

People could kill million of animals, but many more would survive, adapt. And what would humans eat, if the animals are all infected with radiation? They'd kill themselves just as likely. Try to grow crops? Millions upon Millions of birds would not even give them a chance to step outside, let alone get some fresh air.

They'd clog the thrusters in airplanes, throw their bodies in jets, people would not be safe in the sky. In the sea? There's even more dangerous marine wildlife.

Their only chance is to stay holed up in an underground bunker.

[GojiFan]

Um, I'm sorry but when is the last time any animal has gotten to the moon, much less survived on it? Humans make up for a lack of natural weapons/defenses with technology. You think marine life is going to sink an aircraft carrier or a submarine? Please. The navy's sonar has actually been known to outright kill marine life, including the largest of animals- whales. That's right, the means of finding other military vessels kills marine life.

You severely underestimate the damage humans can do to animals and the environment in general while grossly over exaggerating the intelligence of animals. How exactly are birds going to know to clog the engines of planes? All they have is aggression toward humans, not a sudden awakened sense of intelligence.

Also, there are these things called plants, and they don't need to be grown outside. There would be a lot of casualties, but humans would win without a doubt. You also fail to mention how the animals are going to survive if they are focused on killing people. Many animals can't survive nearly as long as humans can without food, so unless they are going to be killing and eating each other, stopping to eat plants, or people (which there won't be nearly enough), they are going to die much faster since people have these nice things called freezers and canned foods.

[CatfaceFourtoes]

^
I agree. Humans have the most deadly natural adaptations of any animal. Hands for manipulating tools and objects, and a brain that actually allows humans to change the environment around them to serve their lifestyle. Man also has nukes, and if it came down to it would probably not care about their fellow men outside the bunkers they are hiding in enough not to use them to kill off most of the animals that could kill man. Plants and even animal tissue can be grown in labs under controlled conditions for a viable food source once everything above ground has been nuked. Plus, we have technology that allows us to track the migrations of large animal populations, and we have scientists whose sole study is on the behavior of animals, so it is not so likely that we would be caught unawares en mass by an animal uprising. Again, humans hunt track and dissect other living things to know how they work.

The only thing that would be a human weakness in this battle is the ability to empathize. Some people would initially probably be unable to bring themselves to commit wholesale slaughter of entire species. These animals gone berserk would not have that moral dilemma.

[Feline-Owl]

Um, I'm sorry but when is the last time any animal has gotten to the moon, much less survived on it? Humans make up for a lack of natural weapons/defenses with technology. You think marine life is going to sink an aircraft carrier or a submarine? Please. The navy's sonar has actually been known to outright kill marine life, including the largest of animals- whales. That's right, the means of finding other military vessels kills marine life.

You severely underestimate the damage humans can do to animals and the environment in general while grossly over exaggerating the intelligence of animals. How exactly are birds going to know to clog the engines of planes? All they have is aggression toward humans, not a sudden awakened sense of intelligence.

Also, there are these things called plants, and they don't need to be grown outside. There would be a lot of casualties, but humans would win without a doubt. You also fail to mention how the animals are going to survive if they are focused on killing people. Many animals can't survive nearly as long as humans can without food, so unless they are going to be killing and eating each other, stopping to eat plants, or people (which there won't be nearly enough), they are going to die much faster since people have these nice things called freezers and canned foods.

That is true.