HOME | DD

#comic #concept #conceptual #dragon #lapis #natural #nature #predation #predators #prey #survival #wildlife #lapislazuri #theazurewoes #misception
Published: 2016-12-06 15:46:01 +0000 UTC; Views: 2265; Favourites: 29; Downloads: 6
Redirect to original
Description
Warning: potentially dangerous, politically incorrect and morally relentless ideas ahead. Oh yes, and cussingHellooooooooo my friends. As some of you certainly noticed, I upload a comic of my own making every now and then, featuring none other but my own very humble (NOT) and otherwise awesome and adorable self X3 At some point I thought: what better occasion (i.e. excuse) to spam you guys with some of my contemplations over things. I call it "misceptions" (rather lame title, but eh) and you understand that in any way you want.
This is not really part of the The Azure Woes comic series. It just shamelessly uses it as means to spread the vile and viciously virulent spores of my intellectual evilness
So what is this really about.
I happen to be a bizarre individual who likes to ponder over things he could simply pass by (as decent normal people do, but I am neither). I guess I have way too much time at my disposal. Sometimes I go into a problem and analyze it (because too much free time as specified already), occasionally I reach conclusions which I am arrogant enough to believe are worth sharing with others. Or quite honestly, sometimes the ideas and attitude others demonstrate, mildly said, irritate me so I'm itching to show them just how much they are wrong in my eyes. Indeed, I've been literally itching to shout to the world: "You're damn wrong with that!" ....alright, not quite literally, but in any case enough to make me draw a freaking comic. My innate laziness so totally busted oO The n-point form of doing that is convenient and a strategic move. People like reading stuff like "10 things you'll disagree with" or "7 ways to enlarge your boobs". Well, take that as my self-made "5 things you might disagree with but that won't really quite stop me from saying".
Oh yes, feel free to discuss if you want. But be warned, I'm not prone to change my views. I am not tolerant for quarrels either.
First, I'll address Nature. Because it's my field, so to speak. Nature and more precisely, the neverending struggle between predators and prey. Everybody knows how that works, right: the predator chases the prey, catches it, kills it and eats it. Somewhere around the "catches it" and "kills it" points most people go off: "Oh nooooooooo! Poor calf / antelope / deer / rabbit / whatever, got murdered by the big bad wolf / lion / tiger / lynx / whatever!" And THAT is what irritates the Hell off of me. Read on the next 5 points, which are really just a ridiculously stretched to the point of breaking "SHUT THE FUCK UP!"
#1 There is a consistent tendency in people to like prey animals better than predators. You don't think so? (Because, for example, you're thinking of how beautiful a tiger is or how majestic a lion is with his mane.) But imagine you're watching a group of lionesses attacking an antelope or a bison or worse - a cute little zebra baby, aww what a shame. Would you rather sympathize with the lionesses should they fail that attack or with their prey should they succeed? I'm guessing most people will sympathize with the victim a lot more. Likewise, the predators are easily seen as the bad guys because it is in their nature to kill - but that is utterly unfair. Technically, all organisms kill, in every day of their life. This is how life works - one life form takes life and/or living space away from another - because there is simply nowhere else to get it from. Predators have evolved into taking life away from other animals - which doesn't make them in any way worse than their prey, it is a way of life like any other. But the truth is, by doing so they actually benefit their prey too - not the individual they kill, obviously, but the population it belonged to. First, because they always kill the old and sick first (because it's easier, it requires less energy and is therefore vastly more preferrable) - thus leaving the population in a generally better condition; second, because by reducing the number of their prey predators prevent overpopulation which on its own is a certain way into an ecological disaster. This way they actually don't harm the species they hunt - they help them achieve balance with the environment. That makes them a corner stone of prosperity for the ecosystems they are part of and that alone is a good enough reason to respect them.
#2 Generally, the life of predators is much more uncertain and difficult - even if it may not seem so to you. You're probably thinking about the deer in the woods, how timid they are because at every moment someone might attack, kill and eat them. Their survival, however, is much easier and often practically guaranteed - simply because their food is all over the place. For predators, things are more complicated. If you want to live, you must eat, if you want to eat, you must hunt. This isn't your huntsman uncle's hobby, where if he fails he simply goes home and cooks dinner with something he got from the supermarket. This is real life - if you fail in your hunt, you and your cubs will go starving. And while you probably think that's fine, predators still succeed in their hunt a lot of the time, this is not really the truth. Most Nature-orientated documentary films tend to focus largely on the hunting success of predators. This leaves a false impression in many people that predators succeed in their hunt a lot. No, they don't. In fact, most of them only succeed in one out of several hunts, at best. Every failed hunt however is still a lot of energy lost because you don't hunt by grazing, you hunt by running at the top of your speed. Ask yourselves how many times can you do that for before you collapse - and all that for a single meal, without having anything to eat in between. Then ask yourselves how long you would survive if this is your only way to obtain food. Furthermore, in many cases there is another problem with hunting as well - it is actually dangerous. Most prey animals aren't really completely defenceless. They have horns, hooves on powerful legs, they can impale their attacker or shatter its skull with a kick. If that happens, the injured predator cannot go to the hospital and receive care. In Nature, serious injuries more often than not mean death. This is what their every day looks like - a matter of life and death, life or starvation, life or mortal injury, and they have no other option, no other way to survive.
#3 Now it comes to my own affinity towards the intelligent species over the less intelligent ones. This is very subjective and as such it's not a valid argument. However, I need to point out that, with few exceptions (like the horse and the elephant), generally predators are much smarter than the average prey animal. Intelligence can easily be your best bet in killing your prey. Often times the prey is actually faster than the predator and/or has more endurance in a run - which is logical because its survival depends directly on speed. If the predators cannot outrun it, they will obviously have to outwit it - by setting ambushes, by sneaking closer before the actual attack or by driving it into a trap. Many predators who hunt in packs rely on sophisticated strategy like when a couple of members of the pack scare the prey and chase it towards the rest who are waiting in ambush to attack. Marine predators like the orcas and dolphins use a whole set of amazing strategies and techniques in order to hunt fish or seals more easily - and they even constantly invent new ones. At least to me, their resourcefulness and imagination is very appealing and amazing. That of course, this is up to you.
#4 When you sympathize with the prey when it's being killed, you should take into consideration that there are a lot worse kinds of death - one of which, starvation, is what predators face if they fail in their hunt for too long. As mentioned in the earlier paragraph, most of the time they do fail which means that even in their best days their survival is never guaranteed for long. But what happens in their not-so-best days is that after they have failed over and over again for a while, their reserves of energy - which are limited to begin with - start to go depleted. With this their chances of success in hunting dramatically shrink. One point on they are virtually doomed because they simply don't have energy required for the hunt anymore. This however is still far from the moment of death. After that they continue to live for a given time, while their body literally eats itself from inside - something that, I assure you, is really not pleasant - until finally they are so weak they don't even have the strength to digest anymore. There is hardly a sight any more tragic than a once-majestic lion starving to death. Each time they succeed with a hunt this saves them from this cruel and ugly death. This is why each time they catch a prey I rejoice at their success.
#5 Nowadays, there are a lot of people who love Nature. More like, they believe they love Nature. In truth, the majority of them really love their own notion and image of Nature and not Nature as it really is. Before you feel offended by this, ask yourself how you picture Nature - as a beautiful, harmoneous world where all the creatures roam free, or as an uncertain, dangerous world where all creatures have to struggle for survival and each and every day of their life is a battle. In fact, most people who love Nature have a very idealistic image of it - to a great extent again because of the popular documentaries which more often than not show the milder side of things and avoid too much violence. Nature however is violent in each and every day, on every inch upon the Earth where there is life there is also a violent struggle for survival. Even the grasses you step on and perceive as entirely peaceful in fact wage endless wars among themselves, using raw strength and chemical weapons alike to suffocate or otherwise kill their neignbours and thus gain a little more living space under the Sun. That applies on every level, in every species, in every ecosystem, everywhere. Nature is a warfield, guys. Peace is but a strange illusion fabricated by mankind. I never said you have to like it - I only say that if you claim you love Nature you must be aware of that fact and respect it. Truth is, this omnipresent natural warfare is not a bad thing. It is how Nature and Life work and work best because this neverending warfare is the main powerful engine of evolution and thus the reason for the vast and marvelous variety of lifeforms on Earth we see now. None of the beautiful, amazing creatures of astonishing, almost supernatural abilities we know would have come into being without this incessant struggle for survival. It may be cruel in its ways, but it freaking works. So respect it and appreciate it, though violent it may be, because this is the best way it can be.
Finally, I must say that too. In the majority of people, their attitude towards predators is the typical one for a prey animal. No wonder. After all, before they tore themselves off of Mother Nature humans were prey animals. Apparently their mindset hasn't changed much since then. However, still retaining that kind of attitude, given what the world is like now, is, very mildly said, hypocritical and hideously shameless. You are not being eaten by predators anymore. In fact, you have become the most devastating predator on this planet - one which not only kills, but also destroys entire ecosystems, and does it not only for food, but for every other possible reason, including for fun. No other species kills nearly as many living organisms as humans do, every fucking day. No living species kills as many living beings per caput, either. Blaming predators for killing is one thing. But then you should start from blaming yourselves.
Related content
Comments: 30
Xenocanid [2023-03-25 05:37:34 +0000 UTC]
π: 0 β©: 1
lapis-lazuri In reply to Xenocanid [2023-03-25 09:03:17 +0000 UTC]
π: 1 β©: 1
Xenocanid In reply to lapis-lazuri [2023-03-25 09:28:57 +0000 UTC]
π: 0 β©: 1
lapis-lazuri In reply to Xenocanid [2023-03-25 10:12:24 +0000 UTC]
π: 1 β©: 0
Vaya-Dragon [2018-10-15 15:06:59 +0000 UTC]
This reminds me of a video I saw on YouTube. It was about snakes, and one of the snakes ate some baby birds.
The comment section was full of people wanting to kill the snake, saying how horrible snakes are and how snakes should go extinct.
I understand feeling sorry for the baby birds, but snakes are predators, they are not βevil.β
π
π: 2 β©: 1
lapis-lazuri In reply to Vaya-Dragon [2018-10-17 13:09:02 +0000 UTC]
I couldn't agree more with you. Hell, this sort of ignorance really makes me mad. Not only it's unfair, it's actually arrogant and hypocrite. Like humans are entitled to slaughter millions of non-human animals for any reason they please and in most disgusting ways, but as soon as a predator kills somebody with their own paws, they are a murdererΒ Β
Sorry for a bit of rant.... I'm fed up with it by far by now :/
π: 0 β©: 1
Vaya-Dragon In reply to lapis-lazuri [2018-10-17 13:50:05 +0000 UTC]
Thatβs ok, Iβm not upset by your rant at all.
π: 0 β©: 1
DuskyScales [2016-12-12 21:19:36 +0000 UTC]
Seems like a really cool idea for a comic serious~ c: I look forward to seeing some more of these, if you decide to do more.
This tends to be something people don't put much thought into unless they actively take interest in wildlife, hopefully people will find it interesting if they haven't thought about how predators live. It can be dangerous t be overly sympathetic to prey species just because they're cute, or the predators are 'mean'. X3
π: 1 β©: 1
lapis-lazuri In reply to DuskyScales [2016-12-13 10:52:49 +0000 UTC]
Thank you!
Indeed, especially when people tend to kill of predators because they are a "pest". Frankly speaking to me they are much more beautiful and captivating than their prey, in the general case.... But all have their very important place in the ecosystems.
π: 0 β©: 1
DuskyScales In reply to lapis-lazuri [2016-12-23 20:55:00 +0000 UTC]
Ye, thankfully the people who don't understand how things balance out don't tend to do much to affect them either.
π: 0 β©: 1
lapis-lazuri In reply to DuskyScales [2016-12-29 11:14:41 +0000 UTC]
Ummm.... actually, it's quite the other way around. Most of the time it's the exactly those who know nothing that tend to interfere and wreak havoc - be them random ignorant idiots or entire greedy governments and corporations, especially corporations. They don't understand how the biosphere works and only seek to pillage for profit, neglecting the damage that causes. That's why ecosystems around the whole planet are suffering and disappearing.
π: 0 β©: 1
DuskyScales In reply to lapis-lazuri [2016-12-30 23:11:13 +0000 UTC]
That's true, I was thinking along the lines of people who like to rant about how horrible certain animals are without ever doing much outside of their immediate vicinity, if that. The ones who tend to be ignored in proper discussion, but then they tend to get other people with no idea about ecosystems to agree with them, so yeah, not so harmless.
I'm not sure why that came to mind really, I don't even.
π: 0 β©: 1
lapis-lazuri In reply to DuskyScales [2017-01-01 15:51:36 +0000 UTC]
Problem is that "in the immediate vicinity" also includes idiots who shoot lynxes, murder wild dogs and cheetahs (who are far too rare already), lay poison baits for wolves (and by doing which exterminate everything from jackals and wolves to vultures and eagles), murder dolphins (because they "steal" fish) and so on and so on. (Last two examples are from my country and that really makes me mad.) Most of the time said idiots are just stupid ignorant farmers or fishermen, but that is also to say, "normal people" whom political forces try to please before elections. The latter reason recently almost lead to the extermination of wolves in Norway because the government thought it would be good for their campaign to make the farmers happier. Besides, who needs those filthy animals to roam the forest and steal our sheep. Little known is though, most of the time it is not those predators who contribute to mortality in sheep, not in Norway, not in Africa, not anywhere.
Sorry. I've been through that topic lately a lot and it really makes me mad to see just how INCREDIBLY STUPID AND IGNORANT humans can be. Not to mention how much I detest their arrogant attitude towards other animals, to begin with. But anyway. It's far too complicated, and quite too simple at the same time. It's not ecologists or environmentalists who take the decisions, not really. Most of the time decisions are based solely on economical and/or political interests, most of the time the ecological reasoning is completely ignored. Most of the time Nature is being pillaged and devastated without a second thought, and nobody really cares about whatever the consequences may be because nobody can see them coming. Which is why this civilization is headed towards its imminent doom, in my opinion - and I am not going to mourn it one bit.
π: 0 β©: 1
DuskyScales In reply to lapis-lazuri [2017-01-01 21:07:32 +0000 UTC]
Depends on the 'immediate' vicinity, but yeah either way it's completely horrible to act and influence the environment in any way without bothering to actually understand it or learn about it. Not to mention with things like 'stealing resources' and the idea that humans have right to them over animals, even despite our ability to survive without those resources in the majority of cases.
Yeah, that sort of thing makes research even more important. Wiping out a species because they're 'clearly' to blame is beyond idiotic. You'd think that would be clear, but people are quick to blame. I remember that being part of what spread the Black Death, cats and dogs were just assumed to be the problem and killed until the mistake was realized. It's been a long time since I learned about any of that, but I think it's correct?
Yeah, I haven't seen to much of it where I live from what I know, but that could easily be 'quiet idiots' trying to do things without people noticing. I don't really know. Then again, a lot of the animals people dislike where I live are invasive species which can be very destructive to the native animals and plant life.
Especially around election times, they tend to finally try to do things which leads to varying amounts of speed-research before trying to poke at the ecosystem to prove their usefulness. Part of the annoyance with it is that, even if the major consequences are unknown, there are plenty of predictable ones that people either ignore or just don't put the effort into investigating fully before causing them.
π: 0 β©: 1
lapis-lazuri In reply to DuskyScales [2017-01-04 14:24:04 +0000 UTC]
Humans.... *spits* No other species is arrogant and ignorant enough to think of itself as something more than Nature, claim right over everything and everyone else. Even their fucking religions proclaim that. But they'll pay. I'm rather sure of it, I believe in Mother Nature.
Yeah, I remember something like that as well.... *spits again*
I guess it's the same everywhere.... Though distant places like your country are probably better preserved than here. Europe has suffered a lot, being host of "civilized society" for the longest. Though in America same "civilization" managed to exterminate entire species within only decades after they infested it.... and we're talking about widespread species, numbering billions of animals.... I should better shut up....
π: 0 β©: 1
DuskyScales In reply to lapis-lazuri [2017-01-12 21:40:24 +0000 UTC]
Yea, some religions are especially bad about that. >_> Literally to the point of screwing over nature because we 'need' to use up all our resources for whatever reason it was.
It's beyond annoying 'cause we have the opportunity to actually put time and research into things before attacking the source, yet people repeatedly don't bother doing that and misblame things or upset ecosystems out of spite for one species.
I know there are a lot of conservation efforts here, but because our species pool is smaller (or more restricted family-wise) I don't think there's as much which can go wrong? Like, 'cause one action is likely to affect everything rather than causing a chain of events, it might be obvious enough for people to not do it.
That sort of destruction is both amazing and terrifying, especially places as large as America is.
π: 0 β©: 1
lapis-lazuri In reply to DuskyScales [2017-02-09 08:58:54 +0000 UTC]
*spit* That's ridiculous. But evolution has the answer to that as well.... a species that reckless and ignorant is likely to destroy itself, at least partially. But sadly, they'll probably ruin many more species along with themselves....
Actually.... things are exactly the other way around. Generally, biodiversity acts as a kind of precaution against ecological disaster. The logic is rather simple.... Each species in an ecosystem occupies a niche and has a certain role, or function if you think of it as of a working system. If you damage or destroy one or even several species in an ecosystem with large biodiversity, there will be more species left available to fill up the niche(s) you've emptied artificially or else to compensate their function in the system in alternative ways. Therefore the damage and impact will be "distributed", so to speak, between more species so that each of them will suffer less. This way you may cause a chain of events rather than immediate mass destruction, but eventually the system will more easily find a new climax point and balance itself. While if an ecosystem has small biodiversity even smaller destruction into it might prove to be catastrophic and wipe the entire ecosystem out because there aren't enough species in it to compensate the damage done and regenerate and re-balance the system. Because of that ecosystems with higher biodiversity are considered healthier and more stable. They are also the older ones, which have developed longer and have therefore optimized their own structure and functions much more.
I see what is your logic and that's perhaps true. However, you cannot count on humans to not overexploit ecosystems just because the damage they will do with this is more obvious. History has proven they do it anyway. Modern societies are trying to limit the destruction in their own countries, but they are quite fine with fucking up the environment in other places from a distance. As long as they don't see the impact, it's fine. There's another layer of trouble to that, however. These distant places are often in the third world, often in the tropical and equatorial zones. Ecosystems with small diversity are much more vulnerable, right, but you'll say tropical ecosystems are among the most biodiverse in the world. That's true, however, they have evolved in a very stable and constant set of abiotic conditions, which means that their own evolution has lowered their capability to cope with any deviations in these conditions because that hasn't been necessary over millions of years, perhaps. This is how the ecosystems in the Great Barrier Reef, one of the areas of highest biodiversity in the world, is actually very vulnerable to any, even small, changes in the environment and are very easy to knock off balance - and that might cause entire ecosystems to fall apart and die no matter how biodiverse they are. On the other hand these ecosystems, and the ecosystems in the tropical regions generally, are quite key to the ecological balance worldwide because they are the most productive ones, they regulate to a great extent the chemistry of the ocean and air and with that even some aspects of the global climate. So shitting on them from a distance is among the most insane and stupid things the "civilized" part of humanity could do, and it's been doing it for decades.
So things are complicated and there's a whole lot of ways things can go wrong on both ends, both in the already heavily impacted ecosystems of small diversity in the "civilized" world and in the still mostly intact highly biodiverse ones across the "third world".
Hope I didn't bore you to death.... Some burst of bionerdism this morning, coming out of nowhere.
π: 0 β©: 0
Vannjaren [2016-12-08 23:39:52 +0000 UTC]
I don't really have much to add to this, except THANK YOU for posting.
Any time someone happens to say something negative about predators, I simply cannot let their statement fly without pointing out some of these very issues. Life for predators is NOT easy, their food sources are not reliable, are not easily accessed simply by bending down their heads to graze, or reaching up to crop leaves off bushes... it is a struggle for survival, and indeed as you say this very struggle has shaped them to be intelligent and efficient in the fight for life.
Predators often risk serious injury in hunting as well - but they do not have a "safe" option to gather food unlike prey animals. And the greater risk by far of starvation compared with herbivores is something few people really seem to appreciate.
For one thing, when a documentary shows predators having a successful hunt, it seems people think that this happens every time, and that life must be so terrifying for prey to constantly be under threat from the "vicious" predators that kill mercilessly all around them.
NO. FCKING NO.
No killing in nature is ever without reason, and in nature nothing is wasted. To glue on the human idea of this being "vicious/cruel/evil" is simply not applicable - those are things which are done without reason and with malicious intent - in nature killing and death are natural, needed and done for a purpose, and ensure the continuation of life as a whole.
Such documentaries do not show the six or seven previous ATTEMPTS at a hunt that may have occurred before the successful one, the struggle the predators endured in not being detected by their prey, in getting close enough to strike but unfortunately missing, and still hungry, continuing the search - whilst the prey has all the energy they need as their food doesn't run off. Plus in terms of people thinking of prey being constantly terrorised by predators - they have been preyed upon for thousands and thousands of years, and are perfectly refined to this lifestyle - their senses are acute to give them warning, they have either swift bodies or sheer power and bulk with which to either escape or defend themselves. Herbivores are far from weak or defenceless - as you get more of an appreciation of if you've frequently been around large cattle and horses.
This is their way of life, and the actual frequency of predator attacks isn't like some constant onslaught.Β
*I do rather like how some of David Attenborough's documentaries DO show failed hunts, and showcase more of the predator's struggle and more precarious lifestyle - something sorely underrepresented in most others, giving people misconceptions*
Both groups of creatures have struggles in their lives, and all of it, the exquisite dance of hunter and hunted, is as pure and natural as anything can be - and beautiful if people would only open their eyes to accept and love it as a whole instead of the narrow field of aspects which personally appeal to them. I have to say that as a pure default I always sympathise with the predator most of all. (not that I don't have any sympathy for the prey, and I don't still love and appreciate herbivores of course - but if I had to chose, I'd always make the same choice)
Sorry if this is a bit long, but in a journal of a friend of mine, I read a quote on this subject that I think you might enjoy. An excerpt from the book "Wolf Totem" - which is on my to-read list after some of uni-work is calmed down and I can read more again...
"(Chen Zhen is a Chinese student spending years in Mongolia with shepherds, Bilgee is an old Mongolian shepherd working there.)
Chen Zhen approached the (pregnant and wild) gazelle carefully, which wasn't just any gazelle to him, but a wonderfully warm and soft hind with these pretty, lovely big doe eyes. When Chen pet the animal's head, she fearfully opened her eyes, as if to beg for her life. Chen pet that soft animal, which collapsed in front of him and lay there helplessly, and his heart tightened in pity. Why didn't he protect those tender, beautiful, peaceful animals which only fed on plants, but instead he was on the side of these murderous wolves? Chen, which had grown up with hateful stories and fairy tales about the dangerous wolf, suddenly said "These gazelles are pitiable and the wolves are just cruel, they murder senselessly, a life means nothing to them, they should be torn into pieces."
Bilgee's complexion changed dramatically. Chen Zhen swallowed the last sentence, for he felt that he had insulted the old man and attacked the grassland's totem wolf severely. But he couldn't take back his words.Β
The old man looked at Chen Zhen upset: "Is grass no life? And the grassland? Grass and grassland are the Great Life, everything else is Small Life, and all of that only thanks to the Great Life. Wolf and human are Small Life. Herbivores are more despicable than carnivores. You find gazelles pitiable and grass not? The gazelle has four fast legs, the wolf spits blood in his struggle to chase her. The gazelle can walk to the river when she's thirsty and climb up to the sunny side of the mountains when she freezes, but what about the grass?"
Bilgee barely calmed down. "The grass may be the Great Life, but its existense is the most fragile of all. Short roots in a thin earth. Grown to the ground, it can't move a millimeter to the side. Every one can stamp on it, eat it, gnaw on it, pull it out and throw it away. A bladder full of horse urine can burn large areas of lawn. Grass in sand or inside stone cracks are pitiable for it carries no blossoms, the seeds won't be fertilised. If you talk about pity in the grassland, then the grass deserves that pity the most. What causes the Mongolians the most heartaches are the grass and the grassland."
"You talk about murder", Bilgee continued "but the gazelles murder the grass, and do that in a much cruellerΒ way than a harvester does. When a herd of gazelles gnaws on grass, is that no murder? Doesn't that mean killing the Great Life? When the Great Life is dead, no Small Life will have a chance! The gazelles have become the bigger danger than the wolves."
π: 0 β©: 1
lapis-lazuri In reply to Vannjaren [2017-03-02 10:20:18 +0000 UTC]
One word: humans -.-
But like I said, they are prey animals, they think and react as ones.... besides, this absurd religion-empowered cult for the victim they have.... that's damn unnatural and counter-evolutionary, but that's just my opinion. Anyway.
As for the journal, I agree mostly. It's refreshing to see someone actually acknowledging that plants are alive too. I despise how people always forget that and take them for weirdly shaped furniture. I actually tend to side with plants in most animal-plant conflicts.... (which is usually human-plant conflict, of course, and I totally wish the triffids were real from time to time) .... Though I wouldn't say any life form is pitiable - or cruel - except for humans of course, they're the only ones who destroy for no good reason and they're just pathetic in their arrogance and delusion they're something more than the rest. It's a pity others suffer for their arrogance.... for now.
I actually have a different perspective on plants though. They are far from defenceless and peaceful. In fact, the greatest struggle in Life is between plants, the most of them die not killed by animals (there's just not enough animals for that, if you don't count the humans which use weapons of mass destruction on them, which is totally insane because plants are indeed the fundament of every ecosystem and of the entire biosphere), but more of them actually die in rivalry with other plants, be it in the neverending struggle for space and resource, suffocated by the sheer strength of their peers or never finding a place to even start a new life, or in the vast chemical warfare they secretly wage on one another. It's quite very spectacular to think of all that. Studying them, it's made me really respect them and see them for what they really are - plants are pure evil which gives life to almost everything else on the planet :3 And they're totally awesome in that :3
π: 0 β©: 0
nekonotaishou [2016-12-07 04:47:37 +0000 UTC]
Well said!
So many people don't realize that A) predator and prey are evenly matched; if they weren't, the predator would always catch the prey (which they don't, even fierce lions have a success rate of only about 17-30%) or the prey would never be caught, which also doesn't happen. And B) the "weak defenseless prey" are usually more capable of defending themselves than it would appear; some are even more dangerous to people than predators are (looking at you, Cape buffalo and hippopotamus!)
π: 0 β©: 1
lapis-lazuri In reply to nekonotaishou [2016-12-07 08:02:57 +0000 UTC]
I'll only add that: A) either way one of the species would have gone extinct, which the evolution of both prevents by reaching a balance point between them; and B) not to mention the vast majority of predators never attack humans, unless cornered by them - most of them don't recognize humans as prey and would much rather flee at the encounter.
π: 0 β©: 0
lapis-lazuri In reply to FelisGlacialis [2016-12-06 17:51:52 +0000 UTC]
I had no doubt :3
π: 0 β©: 0
Mudstar-Sibera [2016-12-06 17:23:17 +0000 UTC]
Ah! I love this! Wow you hit just about all the points I often thought myself regarding this issue. I always found it weird that people got sad when predators took their prey. And anyway...humans eat other animals too??? *but of course I'm no longer surprised by their double standards at this point, still no less miffed at it anyway.* -.- I fully agree with all of this and find it a very important issue and you presented it in a very nice way...dang I think this would be good for classes in school if you don't mind me saying... And have to be biased at my wolfies there which you drew beautifully.Β Β Β "We attack fromΒ here" oh my gosh I'ma remember that!!!
PERFECTION! but the anatomy is great on all the animals depicted, even when put in more creative poses it still looks appealing and suites this comic strip. And of course, more love for cheetahs... and just predators in general.
And maybe my inner predator is showing through but...I always found the kill to be beautiful in a way. All these creatures designed and built for this, they need no extra tools or weapons to do it, it's all built in.
π: 0 β©: 1
lapis-lazuri In reply to Mudstar-Sibera [2016-12-06 17:33:27 +0000 UTC]
Aww, thank you so much, fellow predator!
Got really fed up with human misunderstanding or plain ignorance about Nature. It's not like I can re-educate anyone, but that won't stop me from expressing my indignation Double standards it is indeed, and makes me sick to think about.... Anyway, glad you enjoyed it. It was quite quickly drawn, but I tried to be accurate with anatomy nevertheless. My own OCD wouldn't have it any other way XD
Same here, even if I'm not a 100% predator myself. Always found them majestic in what they do, nevertheless.
π: 0 β©: 1
Mudstar-Sibera In reply to lapis-lazuri [2016-12-07 02:31:21 +0000 UTC]
Β
Ha I feel you there... And well that's exactly why we do still need to express these things. Even if we can't fix stupid we can at least protest against it with due evidence. You know I've been wanting to draw some vultures recently...I've loved them for a long time and find them another important part of our ecosystem (hum though which part is not important hahaa none...though I'd be tempted to say humans of course buuut....) anyway just that they are another commonly misunderstood and very unappreciated creature that really helps us keep our planet clean. So some of them may appear in my gallery in the coming months... All of this here reminding me why I wanted to do such drawings.Β
Ah well I like the simplicity of it if you don't mind me saying (and I mean that in a good way.) and I do have a thing for simplicity and imperfection actually but that's another matter, but indeed it's till accurate enough to serve it's purpose which is what we need here so I love it just the way it is.Β
I see, and well thank you then.
π: 0 β©: 1
lapis-lazuri In reply to Mudstar-Sibera [2016-12-07 08:16:44 +0000 UTC]
Good then, I'm always happy to inspire.
Some scientists would disagree with me, but I don't think humans are part of any ecosystem now (except for some still surviving native tribes here and there). They have severed their connection to the environment, they don't get hunted, they don't compete with other species for resources - they just go and take whatever they want from everyone else. They are a disaster in this sense, not an integral part of the system. Pretty much every ecosystem they so participate in or else suppress from around its borders, would be much better off without them.
No, it's fine. Simplicity is something I respect (but don't really wield XD I am damn a damn pedantic perfectionist.) Aww, I'm glad then, thank you!
:3
π: 0 β©: 1
Mudstar-Sibera In reply to lapis-lazuri [2016-12-07 16:28:11 +0000 UTC]
Yeah I hear ya... which is why I said it more in a passive sense. What they contribute is all a concoction of HOW TO SCREW UP EVERYTHING. And ruin it...just general destruction. -.- *growls*
Ah good. ^^ Hehehe I had kind of picked that up a bit. sometimes I think I could benefit a bit from a little bit of being more of a perfectionist myself but...doesn't seem to work for me. woops.
π: 0 β©: 1
lapis-lazuri In reply to Mudstar-Sibera [2016-12-07 17:26:11 +0000 UTC]
Yeah.... I never could comprehend how can they do this.... it's so.... hideous. Come to think of it, I don't want to understand.
You know, that somehow suits a wolf. I can't tell exactly why, just now as you say it, it fits my idea of your kind and I'm nodding like "yeah, yeah, makes sense".
π: 0 β©: 0