>A mountain lion with a bizarre deformity has left Idaho wildlife officials baffled.
>The cougar, who was legally shot last week, had a set of fully-formed teeth and what appeared to be whiskers, growing out of the left side of its forehead.
>>2034910
I'm thinking conjoined twin. Most of the other possibilities they list seem extremely unlikely.
Evolution at work and hunters fucked it up.
>>2034915
First thought should always be hoax.
>>2034917
Hunters aren't apart of evolution?
>>2034917
This has nothing to do with evolution. It's likely it's just a fluke of fetal development that has very little to do with genetics. Had this cougar survived, the world would not become filled with jaw foreheaded mountain lions since it would have no genes for having a jaw forehead to pass on.
>>2034930
>Had this cougar survived, the world would not become filled with jaw foreheaded mountain lions
damn, that's sad.
>>2034930
More teeth, more effective predator. Take that, atheists.
no. I think this mountain lion got shot through the mouth and the teeth somehow traveled through its skull and came out the other end. that's at least my take on it.
>>2034930
>>2034910
"That's normal, because cougars are fish and fish have teeth on their foreheads." - bugguy, 2016
>>2034937
>>2034943
>its not even weird, cougars are fish, and sharks entire bodies are covered in teeth
>>2034943
bugguy is some retard.
>>2034910
Cougar's will fish but they mainly feed off the hunt of deer and smaller woodland critters...
>>2034945
please don't post this gif again, someone is literally torturing that fox :<
>>2035061
How about speak when you're spoken to?
You'd be surprised at the random places teeth will form during fetal development. My buddy was showing me his textbook for his radiology course. Interesting stuff.
So does it get headaches or toothaches?
>>2035076
yes
>>2035076
No it's dead
>>2035061
Go be a faggot elsewhere.
>>2035061
But that's not true.
He seems like a guy who really loves foxes.
>legally shot
Humans are the worst hypocrites. Full scale alien invasion and annihilation would be completely justified.
>>2035285
>intelligent beings at the top of the omnivorous food chain aren't permitted by nature to kill other weaker animals
Fuck off, hippie. Humans are allowed to kill shit just as much as other predators. And I would invite an ayy lmao invasion. Maybe then the human species would grow a pair or face annihilation.
>>2035289
We had "a pair" in the past. And life was fucking terrible.
>>2035289
>humans
>top of the food chain
We barely get into the apex predator category, so no. Of course we are at the top when we take in count rifles, but they were primarily designed for war, not hunting.
But yes, there should be no problem in killing an animal if certain conditions are met, not just "lol I killed a cat because I can and I'm edgy"
>>2035294
Well there might be a middle ground between having a pair because you live in a shithole or become a pussy because you have it easy. Which I think it might be "getting our shit together"
>>2035303
Guns designed for whatever the fuck they are designed for. And how is it that we aren't on the top when we don't even need natural body mutations to overcome the design of evolution? Our collective intelligence and innovation is our strongest weapon. Adapting with specialized tools is better having claws.
>>2035294
What are you going on about? Do you actually think being whiny and sensitive makes life worse? Sure humans could be more conservative with natural resources, but whining doesn't make change.
>>2035303
>middle ground
I get what you're saying. But the challenges of today are different (for the most part), and man always adapts. We may be thinking different stereotypes though. I do think that when faced with a challenge, today's people will rise up to just as they did in earlier. Today we are globally conscious, and it's difficult to grasp what can be and what can't be done.
>>2035305
>What are you going on about...
I think you have misunderstood something. I was in exaggerating manner talking about the manly man and life of conquest becoming obsolete.
>>2034922
No they aren't dickshit-stain; they would be a part of augmented natural selection.
lrn2semantics
>>2035305
>And how is it that we aren't on the top when we don't even need natural body mutations to overcome the design of evolution?
If by that you mean that we had no mutations you are wrong. But if you mean that we haven't needed mutations to be where we are now you are right. We needed
>Our collective intelligence and innovation
And, most impotantly, sheer numbers.And a bit of luck I'd say (being a preadaptated specie in a favourable enviroment and all of that)
Also, if you take a look at history a very small percentage of humans are the ones that developed or designed HUGE improvements in our tech and most of the time said improvements had nothing to do with wild animals we didn't really care about biosphere except on some occasions.
We developed our societies, technologies and weapons without giving a shit that a bear would appear in the forest and wreck your shit, if you didn't go there chances are that you would fear more vikings than bears and for good reasons.
Humans have been living in the equivalent of Chinatown of nature.Almost everything we did since agriculture was consequence of the relationships we had with other humans (and mainly war, hell there is a reason why this term is associated with biological escalation)
>>2035316
Abos aren't humans.
>>2035316
Vikings were pussies that needed 7:1 odds against villagers to win anything.
>Humans not top of foodchain
>We could have wipe out most living things in the world if he wanted to
>Humans adapt happily to the shittest conditions where no other animals go.
>We are the cause of many Massive Extinction events
We are on par with nature and meteors.
>>2035303
What?
Humans are so far above the top of the food chain it's not even funny.
>>2035472
>>2035442
Basically this. We are almost gods around here. We can push ANYTHING into extintion if we try hard enough. Ni living being whatsoever is capable of representing a threat to us as a species. Sure, some isolated individuals might get eaten here and there, but we are so much above anything else that there's no possible competition. Earth is literally ours.
>>2035289
Not sure if trolling or genuinely this stupid
>>2035442
>>2035472
Only with our current tech, and we have overdeveloped it so fucking much we have became "gods" and practically can say that we have stepped almost completely of the Natural Selection ride like centuries ago.Consider that there are many people with diseases of all types that are now common that would not last a day in the Reinassance.
But like I said, pretty much all of this progress is result of our "isolation" from nature. If prehistoric tribes didn't find a way to depend less on nature (or the Ice age continued a bit more so crops wouldn't be possible) all of this probably wouldn't happen.
Notice how before agriculture, those species extincted by humans were (most of them) already diminishing. After that things got worse for animals because suddenly humans had bows, and then firearms.
Again, we developed most tech not as a response against nature (to kill preys or defend from predators and environment) but as a response against/for US.Which is literally an "evolutionary pressure" that no specie has had EVER at least with this scale.So it is kinda "unfair" to compare a modern human with another animal in terms of power or supremacy.
If a group of Ayy lmaos that are almost exactly equal to us in basic physical terms (you could even call them xenohumans) but had let's say 3000 years more of History and development conquered our planet, would you consider them top of the chain?
>>2035607
ITT Anon derails the thread as usual with yet another failed attempt at Attention Whoring Disguised as The Young Person's Style of Fashionable Erudition.
moar teratomas
>>2035837
Shut the fuck up, I ain't the one that started with the whole humans should be anhilated thing, just that we shouldn't jerk off so much about ourselves.
Anyway since this discussion has gotten out of hand here is a pic of a cojoined snek.
Not trying to be stupid, but I was wondering if it had sensitive "head teeth" in the winter...That would suck :(
Oh fuck.
Its The Thing.
It's a teratoma.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teratoma
>>2036203
Where are the flamethrowers?
>>2034910
Looks to me they are evolving into some type of super predator due to hunting. Imagine going into the woods and found a eight feet one hundred pound of pure muscle cougar that can part its mouth and have two sets of teeth and a bar poisonous tongue. That would be badass. Horror driven, but badass. One huge ass monster.
>>2035061
I've seen the video. The animals literally likes him.
I have nothing against it.
>>2035061
>torturing
No, actually I'm fairly certain that fox is a pet with a neurological disorder, and is not being abused.
more teeth
more dangerous
>>2035312
Your retard.
We are nature too. If tomorrow we kill every animal on earth it's still natural selection. Bit we have left some ethics and economic interest in them
>>2036400
learn what words mean before you try to use them
>>2034945
I luv doing this with my doge
>>2036417
>we are animals
>animals killing animals is natural selection
>>2034910
Oh what the fuck
I thought somebody had sewed (sewn?whatever) a chickens head onto the cougar as a hoax at first glance, thought this whole thread was a joke.
>>2036856
>we are animals
but the things we do are not natural
>animals killing animals is natural selection
no, some animals reproducing more successfully than others is natural selection.
>>2036468
>>2036984
Everything we do is natural because we are a consequence of nature. You have a very linear view of nature. It's a beaver damn natural? If yes, then what makes a human damn unnatural?
Unless you simply use the term to separate everything between "created by humans" and "not created by humans". That's very basic.
For animals to reproduce more successfully it implies that the less fit animals are dying (be it by being killed by other animals or illness) or because the less fit don't have enough energy to dispense into reproduction.
Although, I agree that humans killing animals isn't a sort of natural selection against the animals species themselves...but against us.
>>2037042
dam not damn :^)
>>2037042
>Unless you simply use the term to separate everything between "created by humans" and "not created by humans". That's very basic.
That's the fucking definition of the word, hell yeah it's basic.
>>2036206
Teratomas lack bilateral symmetry.
it's a parasitic twin.
>>2036468
lol
>>2034945
I heard that fox was killed by a coyote. Is that true?
>>2037033
Holy shit I have that same mug
>>2035607
>but had let's say 3000 years more of History and development conquered our planet, would you consider them top of the chain?
Yes. It is completely fair to compare modern humans to animals, our best weapon is our brain and all our tech is an extension of our brains.
>>2035294
tell me how you lived in a time before your birth, omniscient one
>>2039420
I'd say there is a limit of what tools we would "naturally" use and those who are beyond that.
Pretty much the same way we consider that wolf packs are formed by a father a mother and the sons (which have their hierarchy but are always below their parents) but in "artificial" packs ,like the ones on Yellowstone, the alfa,beta,etc nomenclature works since they aren't familiar clans.
>>2036417
that definition isn't preventing these sentences from being correct: "humans are natural", "humans are animals"
>>2039652
it's preventing the post I was replying to from being correct.
>>2035289
No, because nature is an abstract entity completely indifferent to anything we do and thus cannot 'permit' anyone to do anything. Darwinism is an observation of nature, not a bestowed right, you fucking retard.
>>2035037
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzZqxkkUHLc
At least its not shuckle
