Have humans ever killed animals using just their bare hands (..and teeth)?

This is very much related to the Humans are herbivores thread that Apples+Oranjes started - and, indeed, one or two people explicitly referred to this point in that thread - but it seems so important to me that I thought it merited a new thread. (...plus, if people aren't feeling up to a 101 in 'Comparative Physiology', it offers an easier way of digesting some of the same points!)

---------------

Hasn't it always been with the use of tools, weapons or other animals (..e.g. spears, axes, guns, butcher's knives, dogs) that humans have killed, chopped up, and eaten *animals?​

This seems to further substantiate the claim made by many that humans are not particularly suited to eating, or killing, animals - nor ever have been! To the best of my knowledge, all carnivores and omnivores kill, dissect and eat animals with nothing other than their own teeth and limbs. Not so with humans! Not even - or rarely - possible with humans I believe I am correct in saying!

This just dawned on me the other day, so I thought I'd check to see if it made sense to you guys too. It seems to further refute the argument that 'it's natural for humans to eat meat' - which, unless one is prepared to adopt a rather dubious interpretation of the word 'natural', I don't think can be deemed valid.

Perhaps using precedence in nature (i.e. the 'natural' argument) is of limited value when discussing the merits of, or the sense in, a plant-based diet - it seems to me that it is to be honest. Insofar as it is relevant, however, and insofar as critics use the argument, I think it should be thoroughly evaluated.

Thoughts? Comments? Criticisms?...they're all welcome! (...I am prepared to revise my opinion. As I said above: it seems to me that what is 'natural' is of limited relevance anyway). I guess this is quite likely obvious to some of you already? Also, forgive me if this has already been discussed thoroughly on the forum.

* The 'animals' I refer to - in this context - do not include insects, which obviously don't demand the same degree of 'disection' as other animals, and which other primates are known to include in their diet. This may seem like a frivolous distinction, but I think it's important (...I'll shut up now - honest!)

 

This has always been a favourite argument of mine. Anyone who thinks it's 'natura' for humans to eat meat needs to strip naked and then try and catch themselves a cow to eat. Good luck.

 

People do a good job of killing other people withe their bare hands

I once snapped a fawns neck.....not as easy as it sounds, or how it looks in the movies

 

Survival of the fittest. Humans, with practice, could kill with their bare hands. But why would you do that and risk injury when you could kill it with a significantly lower risk of injury?

Guns, knives, bows, or whatever. It makes hunting easier, and safer for humans.

I bet if you took some marines, they could kill animals with their bare hands. Animals are taught by their parents to hunt and kill, and how to do it. If humans were brought up like that, then we too could do it.

 

They'd have to catch them first. And having caught them, they'd be more likely to sexually abuse them, I would imagine

 

Catching them would be no problem. You seem to be someone who thrives off of the tabloids.

 

Animals(humans included) use what their talents are. Lions are able to chase and overpower their prey. Spiders trap them in their web. Humans use weapons and traps to get their animals. We have developed with a larger brain because we dont need blazing speed and brute like strength. What about scavengers that prey on other animals killing an animal for them?


How can you say it's NOT natural? and what on earth is NATURAL? If animals(non humans) do it, its natural...if humans do it..its unnatural?

Also, how is using a gun to kill a deer any less 'natural' than a 250,000 dollar farming machines tearing up the earth to bring us veggies? So i dont see how using a gun to net humans food is any less natural than a person using a shovel, hoe, or turbine to harvest fruits/veggies. All are tools developed by human ingenuity..all are equally natural.

 

Yeah good point.


They should come have a go catching Casey (my rabbit) with their bare hands. Even in a confined area and him being fairly tame it's no easy feat.
Couldn't imagine trying to do that in the wild, let alone anything bigger (or indeed smaller)

Must admit, it would be fun to watch them try.

 

actualy there are a number of animals that use tools to catch,dissect. their pray chimps and baboons use sticks,(to catch termits) and stones to open sculls. seagulls drop shellfish on to rocks to crack open the shell, im sure there are many more examples but im no expert. why is it not natural for humans to use these same tools and improve on them i would say it is a natural thing to eat! i would challenge anyone to live be a vegitairian in the wilds of alaska!

 

I can kill you with my bare hands. But it's much easier to just shoot you. Same thing with animals. You know once upon a time people werent the whining maggots most of you have become.

 

And once upon a time, the world wasn't ruled by conservatives who have no sense of right and wrong, either. And, if you don't want to hear all the whining ... LEAVE, and never come back. Otherwise, shut the hell up and be a man about it, you whiney little maggot.

 

^^^^i was going to suggest the same thing, but with more profanity.


i think the same thing often. i wouldn't mind eating meat if i was the one to hunt it down, and kill it. and it was able to put up a fair fight. otherwise, veggies are good thanks

 

Hikaru, once upon a time the was a liberal hero. His name was Bill Clinton. He had no sense of right or wrong either. Did you know he cheated on his wife... then lied under oath about it!

I think it is wrong to do that, whereas you obviously don't, because you imply that conservatives have bad morals.

I believe that it is right to put the needs and desires of humans above the needs and desires of animals.
While we're using the "despised political profiling..." Liberals are for being open-minded, so how can you say I am wrong while being open-minded at the same time?

Once upon a time, people were respectful to eachother while debating. I can see that that was lost to you.

 

VERY true specially those dangerus animals back then.

 

Fuck Bill Clinton. He was not liberal. He was a Democrat. Democrats are just as stupid as Republicans. They just so happen to be right about a few more issues. Democrats don't get the whole picture anymore than Republicans do.

Conservatives, by definition, are immoral. A conservative, by definition, wishes for no change, or for change to progress back to the way things used to be. In the past, there have been massive-scale wars, the Crusades, countless abominations. Conservatives just don't want change. Why? Either because they (1) don't get the whole picture, (2) are idiots, or (3) are protecting their current assets in this world, such as most people do in a capitalist system.

I don't know about you, but I don't wish for repeated wars, massacres, and genocides like the Holocaust. But, conservatives, BY DEFINITION, do want these things to continue happening, as they always have. They are, by the book, immoral.

Conservatives think that liberals are immoral because we question their way of life, which is by and large based on the Bible, which is merely a work of fiction. As soon as we have people disobeying the Bible (like all those tree-huggers using drugs, lol), we have conservatives running around trying to get people to understand that it's wrong, because the Bible or the current stereotypes say that they are wrong. But most of the time, they're not wrong.

And I challenge (not rabidly) that way of thinking. I believe that animals are just as sacred as humans. They just, because of environmental and evolutionary limitations, do not have a society that is as developed as humans. Animals still have souls, still feel all of the emotions that humans do, and they even have senses of right and wrong.

I think that there are certain RIGHTS that pertain to humans and not to animals, because our society is founded off of sacrificing some of our animalistic rights for extended "human" rights. However, there are some basic inalienable rights that pertain to all sentient beings, and cannot be taken away, such as the right to life, and the right to freedom.

Well, it's not necessarily you in particular I am disagreeing with. However, for the large percentage of the conservative population, I have not heard a decent reason for a conservative stance on any of the large issues, with the exception of gun control.

I mean, our Constitution is stacked in the favour of conservatives. We have about a dozen states that only have about 1 million residents living in them, and those states are large and predominantly uneducated. There, you have to have a conservative point of view if you are going to have a good life. That's all humans want, so why should they NOT try to have the best life possible?

However, those dozen or so states each get two senators, compared against the states that have large populations and are predominantly liberal, like New York and Pennsylvania, with over 20 million residents total.

So, we are giving states with 1 million residents that are uneducated the same weight in congress as states with 20 million residents that are highly educated. That's why the popular vote (which is always rigged anyway, just look at Nixon's ties to the mob, and countless other Presidents' secret misdeeds) is never the same as the votes that ACTUALLY determine the president.

Our country is supposedly a representative democracy, but our country is neither representative nor is it a democracy. A democracy implies that everyone has equal power. That is FAR from true, especially in a capitalist society. One of the reasons why the Holy Roman Empire fell apart was because it was a pure democracy. And, since our country doesn't accurately represent the population (as shown in the Senate), it is not completely representative.

Anyway, my ultimate point is, I can say a conservative stance is wrong because I can prove it. And I haven't seen almost any good evidence that supports a conservative stance, other than "the Bible says so," which is BS in my opinion.

Well, listen. About USNavyDeadHead, I have nothing personal against him, except for the manner in which he talks. It's arrogant, hypocritical, and downright disrespectful. You know what they say, fight fire with fire.

Either way ... when someone makes an offensive post ... I get offended. So I become offensive back. That's just one way of dealing with it, I guess it's my preferred way.

You'll see that on any other thread where someone isn't trying to start a fight, I'm very reserved and respectful, and quite capable of having a light debate.

 

many a time i have,, actually simple..
See,, bare hands,,,...



Mans gotta eat...

 

This works for my home state(vermont) too. We are arguably the most liberal state in the union. We were the first to recognize civil unions. We are the only place to have a socialist mayor(bernie sanders). However, vermont gets equal representation as large republican controlled states like texas, florida, and ohio when we have only 600k people.

oh, and do you mean athens(not the HRE) collapsed because it was a pure democracy?

 

looks like you got a nice place there hippyhillbilly ya know i tryed to use that same handle when i was trying to set up my email it took me forever to find one that wasnt taken hehehe!!! peace!

 

Humans have never lived without tools. Farmers, hunters and hunter/gathereres all use tools. Tools is what humans use. Any lifestyle we have had has required tools.

 

hikaru i just wanted to say that you always word things so well
you always seem to say what i mean to....but you make more sense, lol.