What If Animals Went to War with Humans?

It’s good to be at the top of the food-chain, but what if that was to suddenly change? What if all the animals in the world suddenly overlooked their differences, teamed up as one united force, and decided to take on mankind? How would humans be able to deal with it? Would our development of mechanized warfare win the day, or would the sheer force and number of animals overwhelm us? Which of the world’s animal species would prove to be the most formidable? That’s what we’ll find out today, in this episode of The Infographics Show, What if Animals went to War with Humans? When we think of a mass war against all animals, the mind first leaps to the larger predatory carnivorous species as being our greatest threat. And at first, that may be the case. A few million humans may well be taken down and lose their lives to wolves, lions, tigers, bears, and other vicious carnivores. But firstly, how many of these animals are left in the wild? Humans have had a solid track record of hunting down and destroying the habitat of these wild beasts. There simply aren’t that many dangerous predators left. Perhaps domestic animals such as cats and dogs would prove to be the most difficult to overcome. And secondly, how difficult would the animals be to simply shoot? Any animal large enough to individually threaten a human being is also big enough to simply shoot them. So the first few days would see a mass slaughter of the larger land mammals, which would no doubt result in some significant human casualties, but we would probably win that battle eventually. Humans may even play dirty and trap a few animals to use to their advantage. The human army may wish to strategically keep some of the larger mammals alive, such as ant-eaters and honey badgers, and use them to tackle the true threat. At what point would the animals be forced through starvation to begin turning on their own numbers for survival? The same potential scenario can also be applied to humans. At what point do the armies turn on themselves? What about the rodents? – While being annoying and spreading diseases, rats and rodents generally have sharp little teeth and are fearless when cornered. However, rodents wouldn’t cause too much of a problem seeing as we know how to tackle them. If you have however read James Herbert’s horror novel The Rats, you might disagree. Rats breed quickly. One pair of rats can produce 2,000 descendants in a single year. But firstly, we can kill rats with pesticides already developed and at our disposal. And secondly, we know all about rats. We have lived side by side with rodents throughout history. We have individuals, and corporations, that specialize in the disposal of these vermin. They are a known entity and for that reason beatable. How about aerial attacks? The majority of bird species are quite weak and harmless. The larger birds of prey such as eagles, kites, and falcons are quite rare, and the most dangerous of all the species are virtually extinct. Now make no mistake - a swooping or diving osprey or white-bellied sea eagle could do some serious damage to whoever happened to be walking beneath. But like the larger land mammals, predatory birds could be easily dispatched with rifles and strategically positioned marksmen hidden in elevated hides. Crows would be a menace owing to their numbers and build. Anyone who watched Alfred Hitchcock’s The Birds knows what damage they could do with those talons and hooked bills. But we could use nets and weapons to protect ourselves from the aerial threat. What about the threat from beneath the ground? With insects and ground-dwelling creatures coming at us from beneath, would we be able to resist their intrusion? Well, chemicals might be the answer. Most insecticides are basically condensed forms of nerve gas, and if we pumped enough of those agents into the sub-soil, we may be able to create a shield- It’s just a question of insulating the land surface so those chemical agents do not rise up and kill the humans too. We would also have at our disposal flame-throwers, chemical warfare, and nuclear weapons. Although nuking may not be answer, unless humans could herd animals into an isolated area uninhabited by humans and drop a bomb or two. The danger of doing this too often is that we would eventually destroy our own habitat. Of course it wouldn’t be advisable to go swimming should such a war take place. Sharks, barracudas, piranhas, sea-snakes, the blue-ringed octopus, and stingrays, just to name a few, would be deadly threats. There’s much venom and teeth offshore, so part of the human survival strategy would be to simply stay on land. If humans took to the seas, they would have to do so in vessels sturdy enough to withstand any aquatic attacks. Canoes would be out of the question. Part of the 30 day preparation period would incorporate a program to secure enough drinking water or at least have a safe means to collect water. Snakes and lizards could be put to rest with say, a flamethrower, or by simply poisoning the cold-bloodied attackers. We could tackle poisonous snakes, but we would have to be armed. Those unarmed humans in rural tropical areas could easily fall victim to a well-organized snake attack. Monitor lizards are not to be overlooked. The komodo has sharp venomous teeth but its numbers are small. The crocodile could also easily maim a human with its razor sharp teeth. The real threat, it seems, in this humans versus animal war, are insects. Scientifically speaking, an insect is a member of the class insecta and if the animal has a head, a thorax, an abdomen, three sets of legs protruding from the body, perhaps a pair of wings, it qualifies. Some, like the mayfly, have a lifespan of just 24 hours, and are born without a mouth, because, if you are only alive for a few hours, you don’t need to eat. Others, such as fleas, can stay in diapause, a state of suspended animation, for months, until a new food source shows up. Insects are human’s biggest threat because first and foremost there are a lot of them. It is almost impossible to calculate their real numbers but some experts reckon there are, at any given time, around ten quintillion (10,000,000,000,000,000,000) individual insects alive. That is about 200 million for every one human. Secondly, insects can breed super-fast – as soon as you destroy a million, another million appears. Thirdly, they are difficult to target and destroy. The only real method would be to employ chemical warfare type attacks much the same as the current DEET spraying to stop the spread malaria. And lastly, they like to eat our crops. If the animal army were organized enough, they could target crops and infect water supplies. Insects have the ability to infect the most difficult to reach places, and if they were to take part in kamikaze-type suicide missions, the human casualty rate could be catastrophic. In the cities, most insects would starve as they aren’t adapted to city life, apart from the likes of ants and cockroaches. People would have to sleep in capsules or wetsuits so that they were protected from insect attacks while they slept. Huge numbers of people in rural areas would die from venomous insect bites. If the insect invasion became overwhelming, people could take to the treacherous seas and settle in frozen areas such as Greenland, where they would have to keep an eye out for polar bears. The Polar bear is one of the few animals in the world that actually hunts humans, stalking them for days, before launching an attack. But humans are hardy creatures and maybe our ability to wear clothes to tackle the harsh weather is the contingency that saves them. Seeing as much of the human food source relies on domestic animals, humans might have to abandon farming larger herbivores such as cows and sheep, if these animals turned rouge. Smaller livestock such as poultry and chickens would probably be manageable using similar factory farming techniques that are used today. Chickens wouldn’t put up too much of a resistance even if they were enraged and murderous. So, would the human species overcome all animal species? Probably not. They would not drive all animal species to extinction, as animals breed too fast. Would animals, fighting together, drive the human species to extinction? It is unlikely. With the use of military hardware, chemical warfare, and migratory techniques, humans would be able to put up a stand against animals and survive the attack in significant numbers. But the insect population would probably grow to an unmanageable number with no larger species to keep their numbers in check. The war would probably not be won by either side, but the ecology of the world would be in such a state that the habitat would no longer support the majority of species on the planet. So, who do you think would win this battle between humans and animals? Let us know your thoughts in the comments. Also, be sure to watch our other video called This will happen to your body in the next 60 seconds. Thanks for watching, and as always, don't forget to like, share and subscribe. See you next time!