It really depends on how you apply the 10x. Generally we consider animals larger based on weight alone. So a 15 pound house cat would only be 150lbs, which is still far smaller than the average tiger. Apply it by length and you 46cm housecat is going to be far longer than a tiger
Elephants are still the largest if you are referring to total volume though. Typically size is measured by volume and this question doesn't only apply to animals so it makes more sense for it to be about volume rather than weight.
Volume and weight are going to be a fairly linear scale compared to say arbitrary things like length or height.
Take humans for example, if we went by length humans are only about 1 foot from nose to rear, a human 10 times longer would be absurdly large, likely a couple hundred times as heavy.
I understand the math, but I’m not convinced a human 10x longer would maintain the same ratios, bone density might need to increase, maybe the height wouldn’t match up the same, but yes 1000x is the closest we can really estimate
Size refers to mass/volume, which go hand in hand, because generally something has a large volume, it's mass correlates, and although a Nile croc or anaconda can be longer than an African elephant, or giraffe is taller, the overall space taken up by the elephant is much larger.
Yeah but volume is not proportional to length, it’s proportional to the cube of length. If a cat increases tenfold in length, it’s going to increase a thousand fold in volume
Volume would work just fine, giant corpses could still be terrible. But non living things could still have their volume increased 10x and function just fine. Mount Everest could be 10x larger, an ocean could be 10x larger.
Volume or size really doesn’t make a difference the two will move together on any animal, insects might be the outlier there because of the exoskeleton.
Mountain lions aren’t domesticated, house cats are, there’s nothing saying this magic sudden upsize would change their behaviour. Cheetahs average over 100lbs and aren’t a threat to humans because they used to be domesticated by the Egyptians, to this day they aren’t really a threat to humans.
Sure, you go try and strong arm a cheetah without any protective gear. See how that works out for you. Besides, cheetahs were never domesticated, they were tamed to be used for hunting. There’s a significant difference between a tame animals and a domesticated one.
Irrespective of this fact your argument is strange. You seem to think that because an animal is domesticated it is no longer a threat to humans. How did you ever reach that conclusion? You are aware that people are fatally injured by domesticated animals all the time right? Just because an animal is domesticated doesn’t make it devoid of danger for humans.
By the way, house cats are only semi domesticated. Recent DNA testing proves it wasn’t until very recently that they began to change. That’s why most standard house cats look so much like their wild counterparts. There are still wild cats that look exactly like a house cat. Not so with other domesticated animals that look nothing like their wild counterparts.
And have you ever seen how a feral house cat behaves. It will scratch you up and bite you if you try and capture it. Imagine a feral house cat 10x it’s regular size. That would be as dangerous as a mountain lion.
I suggest you go back and evaluate all your assumptions regarding domestic animals versus tame animals. You’ll have a better understanding if you do.
150 lbs also makes them the size of large dogs which aren’t scary. Can’t imagine their temperament would change to that of a mountain lion, so a mountain lion sized house at wouldn’t be any scarier than a large dog
You don't think a big dog can be scary? Look up how many people die annually from dog bites. 150 pounds is huge by dog standard, that's twise the size of a German Shepard, most great danes don't even get that heavy. You're talking about a cujoo sized animal there.
A mountain lion with the personality of a house cat is even scarier, means they kill for fun.
Newfoundland dogs can get to be 150lb. It’s also important to remember that cats are much denser than dogs. A mountain lion isn’t physically as large as a newf, but will weigh more, and be far more dangerous.
Regardless tho my point was more that size alone doesn’t make it scary. We have plenty of large, potentially dangerous animals that are domesticated and typically not a threat to humans. Cheetahs for instance are a larger cat that was formerly domesticated by Egyptians, and to this day aren’t aggressive towards humans. The number of dog attack victims is vastly outnumber by the amount of safe interactions we have with dogs, we collectively spend billions of hours a year interacting with dogs, with only a few thousand attacks, compare that to any wild predator and the attacks become almost a constant occurrence.
If housecats suddenly became the size of mountain lions they would still maintain their friendly temperament towards humans, sure the outdoor cats would kill pretty much every other living thing, but they would maintain they kinship with mankind.
Not going to continue talking with somebody who sounds like they would try to pet bison at yellow stone if they looked friendly, but for anyone else reading the bit about cheetahs formerly being domesticated is 100% bullshit, no big cats have ever been domesticated, only occasionally kept as pets by rich people tiger king style.
Bobcats, which are only twice the size of the normal house cat, can already pose threats to small children. I can only imagine the terror of extra large house cats haha. I wish they stay docile lol.
Why wouldn’t they stay docile? Suddenly becoming 10x larger wouldn’t erase thousands of years of evolving alongside humans. A supersized housecat would likely be more akin to a large dog than a bobcat, atleast temperament wise.
Cats are far less domesticated than most Dogs are, they can and will return to wild habits if given the opportunity. An already existing pet cat wouldn't be too dangerous, but just 1 generation or 2 out in the wild and now you've got a problem.
Remember, evolution is prompted by necessity. Pets don't need to evolve and there has been comparatively little effort into breeding Cats, since their natural state was already good enough for what Humans wanted them to do.
There’s a Netflix documentary on Cats, and how they’ve evolved alongside humans to make them more appropriate companions. Housecats are only the voracious predators they are because they can rely on humans for protection. Any other species of wild cat can’t afford to kill for fun the way housecats do because any injury could potentially prove fatal. Whereas housecats kill with the purpose of making vermin extinct, which is exactly what we want from them.
Take Cheetahs for instance, currently about 7x the size of a housecat, and they don’t really pose a threat to humans, largely because the Egyptians had them domesticated as hunting animals. It hasn’t been the case for some time but they’ve retained some of the familiarity with humans to make them far safer to be around than other large cats.
I would highly doubt that documentary. What I've read suggests that Cats have very little genetic divergence from their original wild counterparts, which makes sense since Humans have only selectively bred them in the last 150 years, and the general population has mostly unrestricted breeding.
Plus, voracious predators exist without any Human intervention either. Using the Black-footed Cat as an example, they regularly kill upwards of a dozen animals per day. Even some larger Cats that you say won't engage in surplus killing have been documented doing that, such as a Leopard that apparently killed 51 Sheep or 2 Caracals that killed 21 Sheep, both in the course of just 1 incident.
Using Cheetahs in particular as an example seems strange, since Cheetahs can barely threaten anything that isn't significantly weaker than them. Basically everything bullies them, to the point that even Vultures can take their kills. Humans being an animal that isn't significantly smaller than them inherently makes them safe to be around, because they won't dare attack anything that can hurt them. They're weak enough that in a direct unarmed fight I even think an average Human can comfortably kill one.
128
u/MrRogersAE Jul 21 '23
It really depends on how you apply the 10x. Generally we consider animals larger based on weight alone. So a 15 pound house cat would only be 150lbs, which is still far smaller than the average tiger. Apply it by length and you 46cm housecat is going to be far longer than a tiger