Don't trust the chimps!

Pertinax said:
That said, I have no illusions about Chimps- I always think they are THE most dangerous mammal in captivity..;)
Click to expand...

Personally although they are my fav animal I think elephants are more dangerous than chimps. They are highly intelligent ( as are chimps) but their mass size gives them so much more ability to hurt humans. (espicially bull elephants in Musth.)
 
I'd much rather have an elephant escape in a zoo than a chimp though. There'd be no escaping a chimp.
 
Eww that's messed up. Thanks though, certainly interesting to see the damage they could do.
 
Pertinax said:
I don't think you can realistically apply the concept of 'Evil' to any species apart from Humans.
Click to expand...
Playing devil's advocate for a moment; with a less than 5% difference in our genetic make-up, who is to say that the trait to be 'evil' is within that percentile when there are so many obvious differences such as physical appearance. If you follow the logic that social conditioning can alter behaviour at a genetic level over many generations, then humans are less likely to be evil as we live in a society where religion and basic moralities tell us that behaving in such a way is unacceptable, which is not something that appears to exist to any comparative degree in chimp society.
 
johnstoni said:
She was an employee of the chimps owner, and had warned her many times. It was the owner who played with fire, and all the more unjust that it was not her who ultimately got burnt.
Click to expand...
Very very true friend , i think it is the owners fault and responsibility this happened to her , dressing a full grown primate in clothes with nappies how disgusting , where is the animals dignity ?* This kind of thing seems to be prevalent in the United states* , keeping large and powerful primates and other animals and treating them like human children* and playing the role of the surrogate human parents,pathetic!. Its all very well until the animal goes rampant and savages* the faces of such fickle owners orwho keep them in such humiliating conditions or innocent victims ,and then the victim or owner wants to sue anyone they can and put the blame onto anyone other then themselves and of course appear on reality television. As i have mentioned in other forums here on zoochats i had observed the infamous chimpanzee bustah at port lympne only a few months prior to his attack on a 3 year old child , the enclosure at port lympne was well built had security barriers and plenty of signs to warn the parents. To compare bustahs attack to the attack by this chimpanzee on an employer of this foolish and idiotic american woman who decided to keep a chimpanzee as a substitute for* a child i am only suprised it didnt happen sooner.
 
SMR said:
Playing devil's advocate for a moment; with a less than 5% difference in our genetic make-up, who is to say that the trait to be 'evil' is within that percentile when there are so many obvious differences such as physical appearance. If you follow the logic that social conditioning can alter behaviour at a genetic level over many generations, then humans are less likely to be evil as we live in a society where religion and basic moralities tell us that behaving in such a way is unacceptable, which is not something that appears to exist to any comparative degree in chimp society.
Click to expand...

very true amigo , i completely agree that moralities are a fairly recent evolutionary human construct and cannot be imposed upon the natrual world. Here is a deliciously dark quote by my favourite writer the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche who summed this up so wonderfuly.

"Let us beware of saying there are laws in nature. There are only necessities: there is nobody who commands, nobody who obeys, nobody who trespasses.Let us beware of attributing to it heartlessness and unreason or their opposites: it is neither perfect nor beautiful, nor noble, nor does it wish to become any of these things; it does not by any means strive to imitate man. None of our aesthetic and moral judgements apply to it. Nor does it have any instinct for self-preservation or any other instinct; and it does not observe any laws either."

from his book "Human all too human" , perhaps that stupid gringa should have read this quote ,might have helped her friend
 
Last edited:
dragon(ele)nerd said:
Personally although they are my fav animal I think elephants are more dangerous than chimps. They are highly intelligent ( as are chimps) but their mass size gives them so much more ability to hurt humans. (espicially bull elephants in Musth.)
Click to expand...

I would still maintain Chimpanzees to be the most dangerous. Obviously Elephants have been responsible for a greater number of deaths, usually caused by crushing or trampling. However Chimpanzees are far more nimble, can run much faster and inflict a geat deal of damage in a short space of time- though they are more likely to seriously injure you than kill you- with an elephant it is the other way around.

The worst problem with Chimpanzees is they can be excitable animals prone to sudden temper tantrums,coupled with great strength. Relatively few other animals exhibit the same lethal combination.
 
snowleopard said:
I actually caught 10 minutes of Oprah when the victim was on (the only time I've watched Oprah in the past few years:)) and the injuries were enough to just about give me nightmares. Absolutely horrific damage from the chimpanzee.
Click to expand...

probably this woman showing the damage inflicted by the chimpanzee is the only reality ever shown on that beastly reality television programne, ironic isnt it friends that reality television very rarely has any reality to it?
 
Ash said:
I'm not just basing it on this, I've worked with chimps, they are evil lol. They're like the chavs we get in Britain only stronger ;)
Click to expand...

This is a natural behaviour! (obviously not to maul faces, but to defend territory and to attack threats)They are certainly NOT evil. I dislike dogs as I was bitten a chased by one when i was young. I dislike dogs but i DONT think they are evil. As i said it is just a natural behaviour!
 
correct me if I'm wrong but has this violent behaviour has ever been documented in Bonobos?
 
Well you would call a human who killed another human evil, yet chimpanzees often do it and it's described as a natural behaviour? Seeing as we're basically the same I fail to see the difference.
 
And no, I don't think it's been seen in bonobos.
 
I wouldn't say Port Lympne had 'security barriers' for the chimp enclosure at the time, they did at the viewing area, but next to it was a slope going down to the service area with only a chain across it. The door to the service area of the house was open at the time. Not long after the attack all the service drive-in areas had wide gates made of steel and mesh with very clear signs. Port Lympne was slated by the press after this incident.
 
but chimps are like ten times i thinks stronger than the average man...so natural behaviour can lead to severe injuries when chimps confront humans.
 
I was on about chimps killing each other, murdering their own species.
 
Ash said:
Well you would call a human who killed another human evil, yet chimpanzees often do it and it's described as a natural behaviour? Seeing as we're basically the same I fail to see the difference.
Click to expand...

I appreciate your contribution here at ZooChat a lot, Ash, although we often (in a friendly way) disagree on matters such as appropriate enclosure sizes etc.

But now I am getting very confused, indeed. Are you seriously meaning to say that words such as "evil", and if so, I suppose "good" must be equally appropriate, are relevant when it comes to the non-human animals?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top