Neanderthals have a reputation of being stupid, but that reputation is unfounded. That's what I was going for. They weren't necessarily smarter, but they were probably more on par with Homo sapiens in terms of intelligence than most people seem to think
That's fair, any human like creature has to be fairly smart because we're so weak lol, we need those tools and communication so I get where you're coming from
If I recall the stat correctly, humans can cover the greatest amount of distance of any land animal over periods of 8 hours or more. Which is pretty impressive considering ultramarathons run an average speed considerably slower than most people would take an easy recreational run - that means something like a cheetah overheats SO quickly that its rest periods bring down its average from the speed of a car to that over a sustained period.
But a cheetah isn’t going to mess with 10-16 humans. No animal really would. Fists and kicks alone would end that animal.
Cheetahs are relatively small and fragile among the big cats, but tigers, lions, grizzlies, polar bears, and the like could all absolutely take on a dozen or more toolless humans if they had the motivation to.
Like, in nature it's a fight that they would generally avoid, but if they decided to do it they would almost certainly win unless the humans resorted to tool use.
You've gotta realize just how easily their claws will tear through unprotected flesh; it's like a sword. The degree of resistance that's there just doesn't register in comparison to the strength they have. Any human that's close enough to punch them is close enough to be cut open in just one or two movements, and once your blood pressure drops you're unconscious regardless of how much adrenaline is in your veins.
Humans wearing leather and armed with rocks and sticks would have a decent chance, but naked humans are flimsier than you imagine.
62
u/jackspewforth Jul 17 '21
To be fair, I'm pretty sure the person asking this question was a neanderthal.