File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Why are apes so much stronger than humans? Are their muscles that much different?
>> Anonymous
Because they don't sit in a basement and browse 4chan all day.
>> Anonymous
because they, like other animals, have to rely on strength to survive against adversaries, because they do not have tools.
gb2 wikipedia
>> Anonymous
>>205431
They do have some tools.

>>205425
Humans don't need to swing from trees all day.
>> Anonymous
>>205425

Apes arent stronger than humans, maybe gorillas but only because they are huge motherfuckers.

I would like to see a really tought man fighting a gorilla with his bare hands.

Man, that would be SO AWESOME.
>> Anonymous
humans are apes. as to why chimpanzees are stronger than human its most likely that 1% difference in our genome.
>> Anonymous
>>205443
Apes most definitely have stronger arms. Find me a human who can swing through trees as easily as a chimpanzee.
>> Anonymous
>>205464

Speak for yourself.
Humans are not apes, nor are apes human, regardless of how close they're genetic composition is. Apes are apes, humans are humans, both are different species.
>> Anonymous
>>205478
Humans are a species of ape, just like chimps and gorillas, duh.
>> Anonymous
We came from the same common ancestor years ago
>> Anonymous
>>205478
but what about niggers? they're apes.
>> Anonymous
>>205478

>>Speak for yourself

I didnt know that a scientific fact could be my personal opinion. gb2 Kansas.
>> Anonymous
APE MUSN NOT KILL APE
>> Anonymous
>>205514

well, strictly speaking he is right. NO ape and human ever did the nasty, and produced a viable offspring. Hence different species.

primate anthropology, like regular anthropology, is liquid with bullshit, take anything you read as a tentative theory at best.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
LERN2 CLADISTICS

The great apes are interchangeable with the family Hominidae. There are 4 genera: Gorilla, Pan (chimp), Pongo (orangs), and Homo (fags). But these are just genera. For each genera there are many species. For example, both the common chimp and bonobos fall under the genus Pan. Likewise, Homo Sapiens cohabit the genus Homo with other humans, like Homo Erectus.
In other words, chimps, gorillas, etc... are different species and different genera, but we all come from the same family.

At least this is the current understanding and classification, which of course is subject to change...

TL;DR:
HUMANS ARE APES.
>> Anonymous
>>205557
THANK YOU ANON
>> Anonymous
Well my assumption is that they use a higher percentage of their muscle mass safely than we do. Humans can only use about 20% of our muscle's actual strength with out hurting ourselves. And an extereme adrenaline rush can push people over that however. I remember one story of a woman picking up the back half of a car to get her child out from under it. or somthing like that.

Either way its some pretty cool shit. Kinda scary though.
>> Anonymous
>>205557
I'll erectus your homo, if you know what I mean.
>> Anonymous
>>205563
This was a Peewee Herman movie where he told this story and his friend who was trapped under a car called him Mommy and he was able to lift the car off of him because he's weird.
>> Anonymous
>>205443
assuming the gorilla is not gimped, I am pretty sure the man will be fucked up after provoking the gorilla that are able to tear down banana trees by hand.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>205443
picture related?
a great book!
>> Anonymous
>>205563
chimps, etc are stronger than humans not because they have more muscle mass, or use more % of their muscles at once, but the way the muscles are attatched to the bones is different. Muscles on chimps arms are attatched further away from the fulcrum (elbow) allowing them to apply more direct force to the object they are trying to move.
>> Anonymous
Don't know the physiological explanation but the evolutionary reason is clear: apes don't have weapons, but they need to be able to haul their entire weight into a tree and sometimes be able to move it from branch to branch with just one arm (or leg). I guess this isn't true for mature male gorillas, but female gorillas and baby gorillas certainly still climb into trees.
>> Anonymous
Don't forget the fact that most other apes live in a wild environment and are taught to swing and generally exercise and develop their muscles to a far greater extent than a human.

Also, humans aren't *that* weak in terms of maximum arm strength possible - the muscles used in swinging from trees are also used in hurling objects. Think baseball pitchers and javelin throwers. It's just that the average person, of course, is more likely to be an office worker than a javelin thrower.

A chimp pitted against an office worker? Chimp wins.

A chimp pitted against, say, a kid who grew up amongst other chimps? It'd be a draw.
>> Anonymous
>>205675
Nope, that book sucked.
>> Anonymous
>>205443

...is completely wrong.

>>205687

That explanation sounds rational, but it has no basis in fact.

The fact is that Chimps are indeed stronger than humans. MUCH stronger than Humans, in fact--especially relative to their bodyweight. A typical chimp is several times stronger than an adult male human, despite the fact that a chimp usually weighs much less.

A 135-lb female chimp has been tested at being able to exert a pulling force *with just one arm* at over 1200 pounds. You'd have to be a world-class weightlifter to get that kind pull, with your entire body behind it, let alone just one arm. A human man in the same test only managed 210 lbs.

http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_001b.html

Chimps have more muscle mass than humans do. Their shorter limbs and muscle placement also gives their muscles better mechanical advantage compared to a human.
>> Anonymous
Our muscles are designed for endurance, not strength. We can jog for hours, while a chimp would tire out after a short sprint.
>> Anonymous
>>205723

"muscles" are always designed for strength. That's all they do. The only thing a muscle can do is contract, pulling on something in the process.

I think perhaps you meant that our BODIES are designed more for endurance--and that would be true. We have less muscle mass and larger circulatory systems and lungs than apes. Stamina comes from more blood flow and better gas exchange in the lungs--or in other words the ratio of muscle mass to lung volume and blood-flow rate. Chimps have more muscle and less heart/lung than humans do. But, their muscle tissue is virtually identical in structure to that of a human.
>> Anonymous
>>205803
Not completely true.
Sharks have two kinds of muscles: white and red muscles.
One if for endurance, the other for fast reaction.
>> Anonymous
Our lesser muscle density helps us float, also, which is another reason to think that coastal apes in africa are what we evolved from, that "playing" in the sea and eating fish helped us to develop bigger brains and probably caused us to adapt to better exist in a partially aquatic environment.
>> Anonymous
>>205846
like, humans got 3 kinds of muscles.
Skeletal musce, the ones that let you move, Smooth muscles - are in organs, like stomach, and you can't control them, and cardiac muscles, which is - the ones that move your heart.

Animals got way more tendons on their skeletal muscles, like, human has them attached only at the ends of bone, while animals got them attached all the way along.

Thank you.
>> Anonymous
>>205909
And... I suppose this proves that humans are not animals but a kind of fungus, right?
>> Anonymous
>>205803
this is not true. humans have more muscle mass, even compared % wise.
>> Anonymous
>>205923
thats compared to chimps, not gorillas
>> Anonymous
>>205723
I thought it's a structure of body that has anything to do with strength..
>> Anonymous
>>205803"muscles" are always designed for strength. That's all they do. The only thing a muscle can do is contract, pulling on something in the process


You don't know what you're talking about. There are many different kind of muscles types, and they generate strength at different rates. Here are the three types of skeletal muscle fibers found in the human body:

Type I: Resistant to fatigue, consume energy slower. Marathon runners have a lot of these.

Type IIa: Less resistant to fatigue than type I, but generate more strength.

Type IIb: generate a lot of strength, but gets tired easily because it uses anaerobic reactions (no oxygen) to break down glycogen. Body builders have a lot of these.

Read more here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_fiber

Chimps are considered to be 3 or 4 times stronger than an average human, so I assume they have more "strength" muscle fibers than "endurance" muscles.
>> Anonymous
Some interesting information.
Trained humans can with ease outrun a deer or a moose in the forest on the long distance. Hunters often followed their prey until it tires so much it can no longer run. This tactics is very similar to the way wolfs hunt.
Runners were used as couriers much more often then riders. On the long distances (30 miles and up) a trained athlete is faster then a horse.
Yes, humans never were the fastest or the strongest. Monkey could fetch a banana faster then human, and then beat the crap out of a full grown man with one arm. But no monkey could beat a man in a marathon.
>> Anonymous
>>206035
That's what humans have evolved for. Long distance running, tiring out their prey. And vegtards keep insisting that we evolved to eat soybeans. Right, because it's so damn hard to run a soybean to exhaustion.
>> Anonymous
>>205943

I don't think you really understand the difference in scale between the variations in muscle fibers and a real "endurance" situation.

The different "types" of muscle fibers you mention are all variations on a theme. Fundamentally the active element of all muscle fibers is myofibrils, and myofibrils all function the same way. And the net outcome is aways the same: the muscle contracts, pulling in the process.

But regardless of the "type", ALL muscle fibers are dependant on the circulatory and respiratory systems for support. Even the so-called "Type 1" fibers cannot provide any sort of long-term power without depending heavily on gas exchange in the lungs, via the circulatory system.

To make a different example, when you are trying to drive across the desert it doesn't really matter if your car seats 2 people or 4 people. What matters is the size of the gas tank.

I am not disputing that there are differences in muscle fibers, but those differences are not significant when discussing endurance applications or the differences between chimps and humans.

Aerobic capacity is a much better meter for stamina than muscle fiber types. And incidentally, Chimps have virtually the same muscle fiber makeup as humans do, so differences between "types" is moot anyway.
>> Anonymous
>>206206I don't think you really understand the difference in scale between the variations in muscle fibers and a real "endurance" situation.

I think you're an idiot trying to sound smart on the internets, because everything you wrote is wrong.

>The different "types" of muscle fibers you mention are all variations on a theme. Fundamentally the active element of all muscle fibers is myofibrils, and myofibrils all function the same way. And the net outcome is aways the same: the muscle contracts, pulling in the process.

No shit, sherlock. In the big picture, all muscles do is pull. But on a cellular level, you see all sorts of differences between muscle types.

>But regardless of the "type", ALL muscle fibers are dependant on the circulatory and respiratory systems for support. Even the so-called "Type 1" fibers cannot provide any sort of long-term power without depending heavily on gas exchange in the lungs, via the circulatory system.

It's obvious that you slept through most of highschool biology, so I'll remind you how the body works:
-every creature on Earth uses a chemical called ATP as energy.
-The process of turning fuel chemicals into ATP is called "respiration." There are many different types of respirations, like anaerobic (no oxygen) and aerobic (oxygen)
-Human cells need a cellular organ called Mitochondria to use aerobic respiration. Type I muscle cells are built for aerobic respiration, so they have a lot of mitochondria.
-Human muscle cells are capable of anaerobic respiration. This process breaks down fuel faster and generates more energy than aerobic respiration, but it creates lactic acid which causes the sensation of pain and tiredness. Type IIb muscle cells are built to consume fuel using anaerobic respiration.
>> continued Anonymous
>To make a different example, when you are trying to drive across the desert it doesn't really matter if your car seats 2 people or 4 people. What matters is the size of the gas tank.

This analogy is fucking retarded. A more appropriate analogy would be to imagine several different cars with a different engine types in each one (diesel engine, gasoline engine, steam engine, hybrid gas engine, etc). That's how different muscle types work.

>I am not disputing that there are differences in muscle fibers, but those differences are not significant when discussing endurance applications or the differences between chimps and humans.

You're wrong. They've counted fiber types from muscle samples taken from various athletes, and it's obvious that the fiber-type percentage plays a HUGE part in the athlete's performance (ie. Marathon runners have a lot more Type I fibers). If chimps have a significantly more Type II fiber, then it can explain why chimps are five times stronger than the average man.

And yes, chimps are a lot stronger than humans. Everyone who's worked with chimps know this.
>> Anonymous
>Aerobic capacity is a much better meter for stamina than muscle fiber types.

Stop pulling shit out of your ass. It's been proven that people with more type I muscles are better marathon runners.

>And incidentally, Chimps have virtually the same muscle fiber makeup as humans do, so differences between "types" is moot anyway.

Why do people try to argue things that they don't know anything about? Read the following wikipedia articles and find out how wrong you are:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adenosine_triphosphate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Respiration
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondria
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactic_acid#Exercise_and_lactate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_fiber
>> Anonymous
posting this to bump the wall of text up so it doesn't clutter /an/'s front page
>> Anonymous
Bump
>> Anonymous
and another
>> Anonymous
One more
>> Anonymous
Again, I am not disputing that there are different types of muscle fibers. I am disputing their relevance to this discussion.

Fundamentally all muscle cells are simply tools that convert chemical energy into kinetic energy. I agree that different fiber types do this with different efficiencies and different specific chemical processes. But fundamentally all muscle fibers take in chemical energy and use that energy to do their work.

But the fact that is overlooked is that energy has to come from somewhere. Mitochondria do not magically produce ATP out of thin air. "Chemical fuel" as you call it has to be brought into the cells. Likewise, metabolic wastes must be removed from those cells.

A muscle fiber of ANY sort is thus completely dependant on the circulatory system and the lungs. I AGREE with you that some muscle fiber types are better suited to certain tasks than others. But, that is just one factor out of many. My point is that while muscle fiber proportion DOES affect stamina, etc, it does so to a lesser degree than the circulatory system, etc, does. Muscle fibers are useless without that support....just like how a car is useless without fuel.
>> Anonymous
You mentioned that marathon runners have more Type 1 fibers than the average person. That is not proof that the key to being a marathon runner is more Type 1 fibers. Clearly an abundance of Type 1 fibers is advantageous. But marathon runners also have much better lung capacity, blood oxygen levels, and a more powerful heart than the average person as well. They also wear special clothing, eat a special diet, and wear special shoes when they run. No single one of these items is the key to being successful at running a marathon. But the most important factor when endurance is concerned is the function of the circulatory and respiratory systems.

Think about it: When you are doing intense activity and you're at your limit of endurance, what happens? You're out of breath and you might have "cramps" or muscle pain. That is proof positive of how your circulatory/respiration cannot keep up with the demands of your muscles. Your lungs and your heart cannot get nutrients (including Oxygen) into your muscles fast enough, and you cannot remove lactic acid so it builds up and causes cramps.
>> Anonymous
Hmmm.....I'm curious how someone trained to fight (oh say, Chuck Liddel) would last against a male chimp (or even female at that matter) in a caged match.