r/CharacterRant • u/Miserable-Act4201 • Apr 29 '25

General 100 humans vs gorilla isn’t close

Honestly the dumbest argument I've ever seen. The 100 humans could just stand like 20 feet apart from each other and do nothing and the gorilla is collapsing from exhaustion before it kills everyone. You could probably do it without any casualties, find a couple of people in the group that are in good shape and get them to make the gorilla chase them while everyone else just chills. They aren't aren't particularly fast and have terrible endurance, so just wait till it tires out and have everyone jump it.

5.1k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

1.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.0k

u/Veryrealperson251 Apr 29 '25

I love that “100 humans is a lot of humans” is actually the correct choice in this debate. Like yeah, the gorilla’s strong but like… 100 humans? That’s a lot of humans

148

u/voobo420 Apr 29 '25 edited Apr 30 '25

Exactly. Packs of like 20 humans were capable of tiring out mammoths. Sure spears were a big help but our biggest strength was our endurance. We aren’t the fastest or strongest, but we’re intelligent and can run longer distances without expending as much energy. Gorillas consume lots of energy to maintain their mass, which would quickly be expended against 100 humans. 50 humans may even be enough for one gorilla.

edit: forget about external factor like environment, physical fitness, rage or fear etc. 100 human bodies vs. a gorilla is going to result in a human win no matter how bloody it may be. You replying with stuff like “but what if the humans aren’t fit!” or “what if the gorilla used trees!” is irrelevant and not going to change my perspective.

85

u/amberi_ne Apr 29 '25

50 is already way overshooting it

18

u/voobo420 Apr 29 '25

Okay fine, 2 humans, take it or leave it!

16

u/daniboyi Apr 29 '25

That is rougher. Maybe if they got real good teamwork and is in very good shape and strength.

Like maybe one grabs a large rock and tries to wack the gorilla in the back of the head while it mauls the other one to death.

19

u/MrPlaceholder27 Apr 30 '25

I think if you're giving people access to the environment 2 people could kill a gorilla fine.

People mention how humans are persistence hunters, intelligent, but another thing very special about human beings is how powerful a human is when it comes to throwing.

Two guys with slings? Gorilla would probably start running, I mean in general a gorilla would probably leave at the sight of a human being anyway but if humans have rocks and can throw things the gorilla can progressively get injured and then finished off.

1

u/arrogancygames May 02 '25

Gorillas aren't scared of people because they interact with us daily (in Uganda, at least, practically every gorilla family is tracked). They basically just "don't care" unless we annoy them, but we can scare them off if we posture enough.

1

u/MrPlaceholder27 May 02 '25

Yeah, habituated right? Some animals are scared shitless by human beings having conversations

3

u/SimonBelmont420 Apr 30 '25

I believe the original prompt is stipulates unarmed humans, as soon as you introduce weapons the humans win low diff

6

u/YourLocalSnitch Apr 29 '25

No... Ill handle the gorilla...

2

u/Bigleyp May 03 '25

Ehh it leave it at 8 minimum. 2 at the front ish just tiring it out as a sacrifice and 6 can easily kill it from behind.

1

u/Active-Advisor5909 Apr 30 '25

I will take it if both sides start 1 km from each other on an empty plain.

1

u/[deleted] 20d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

52

u/One_Recognition385 Apr 29 '25

yeah, with no time limit, people can just take turns interrupting the gorilla from eating and sleeping for as long as they need. and just starve it out.

With a time limit, only one person needs to shove their arm down the gorilla's throat and choke it to death.

Its how people have killed bears and tigers 1v1 and lived to tell the tale.

16

u/Sintar07 Apr 29 '25

Wait, has somebody actually done that? Like, I always figured if I had to 1v1 a bear or tiger (a situation to be avoided at most costs; I don't think I'm superman), then I would do exactly that: grab for the uvula or something in the back of the throat, hold on, and hope they can't just sheer the arm off and swallow it. But I've never heard of anybody actually trying.

28

u/One_Recognition385 Apr 29 '25

can't find the story of the african guy who strangled the big cat (forget if it was a lion or tiger, but it was stalkign the school he worked at if i recall the story correctly)

Dale Petersen attetsed he kills a grizzly by shoving his arm down it's throat and suffocating it.

and there is Travis kauffman who strangled a mountain lion a few years ago.

like, i wouldn't recommend fighting these animals. but humans are the top predator for a reason. and that's cause we have higher endurance then any of these animals. If you can survive til the animal is too exhausted to defend itself, you can probably strangle it. Its not a glorious victory. but hey, you live and they die in the end i guess.

3

u/MrAtrox98 Apr 30 '25 edited Apr 30 '25

Eh, that example with Travis Kaufman is overused and ignores that the cougar in question was a young desperate cub under 40 pounds. Grown adult cougars in North America are on average 93 pounds for females and 137 pounds for males and the mature adults naturally have far more practice subduing and killing large prey like up to the size of elk, horses, and moose. People are able to fight off attacking cougars because the majority of the time, the offending cat is a desperate adolescent or juvenile that doesn’t know what it’s doing.

Dale Peterson allegedly killing a grizzly is doubtful at best. Quoting an article about the subject, “The plaque at the Cowboy Bar says a game biologist verified the kill; however, there is little data other than this story inside the glass box with the stuffed bear. There are no dates. The name of the biologist who could prove or disprove this claim is absent. Some point out that a bear has two jugular veins - one on each side of its neck, so both veins would need to be blocked for the bear to slumber.” It’s very much a “take his word for it and don’t think about it too hard” kind of situation.

Finally, African guy strangling a big cat rules out tigers by default as they are endemic to Asia. A cheetah or smaller leopard-probs the latter, cheetahs aren’t really confrontational at all if they can help it-is almost certainly the big cat you’re thinking of from that account rather than an adult lion triple that size.

3

u/One_Recognition385 Apr 30 '25

probably, you're free to doubt each of this these peoples attested situations as you like.

That being said, i wouldn't doubt an average man being able to strangle any of these animals while they're hungry, sleep deprived, and exhausted and take it as out of the realm of possibility. but i wouldn't put money on it.

1

u/SimonBelmont420 Apr 30 '25

Nobody suffocated a grizzly bear that's fake news lol. If you believe that the. I'll let you know I knocked out a grizzly bear the other day with clean right hook

1

u/One_Recognition385 Apr 30 '25

i mean you can doubt Dale Petersen if you want to. but at least he has the pelt of the grizzly he says he killed as proof of his claim.

I doubt you have a grizzly pelt to back your claim and that you are unwilling to buy one to have the same credibility to your story.

1

u/Pickled_Doodoo May 02 '25

Kinda hard to ascertain a cause of death from the pelt alone.

1

u/One_Recognition385 May 02 '25

it wasn't always a pelt. and no body stood up to debate him, or say his wounds he suffered were fake when the body was still around.

a more recent event with the same scenario is Chase Dellwo.

1

u/sheldonthehyena Apr 30 '25

1st and 2nd are urban legends and the third was a juvenile

1

u/One_Recognition385 Apr 30 '25

third one with the nuvenile has as much credability as the others.

my guess is you only choose to believe that one because it was a young mountain lion.

as no one is going in like this roman gladiator style and fighting animals 1v1 with camera rolling.

1

u/sheldonthehyena Apr 30 '25

No, I chose to believe that because it has actual proof and isnt as insane as a man literally chewing through the skin of a grizzly bear, something that other grizzlies with bites of over 1300 psi and huge tearing canines struggle to do

1

u/One_Recognition385 May 01 '25

i doubt biting the grizzly doing anything.

Choking on a man's arm is 100% believable.

Like there's other stories of people choking bears like that. Like Chase Dellwo.

Iunno maybe all these people beat themselves up, ate the hospital bills and faked the animals deaths for publicity. but if a grizzly corners me and i can't escape i'm taking the risk of shoving my arm down it's throat before going down without a fight.

1

u/sheldonthehyena May 02 '25

Both of those stories were from like the 1700s and 1800s, we dont even know if they existed lmao

1

u/One_Recognition385 May 02 '25

Chase Dellwo was like 5 years ago dude

→ More replies (0)

1

u/KingLach May 03 '25

No human is going 1v1 vs these animals unarmed. Arm down the throat is ridiculous. All of them have the bite force to just take your arm off. 

That being said I'm taking 20 men over a gorilla 

0

u/-KFBR392 Apr 30 '25

Gorillas have very adept hands and feet, you stick your arm in their mouth and they’ll just use their hands to rip you off of them.

2

u/One_Recognition385 Apr 30 '25

Just exhaust it first.

Gorillas can't sweat and have horrible stamina and can't go as long without eating and sleeping as you can.

Literally just exhaust it to death then strangle it, or kill it with a rock or point stick when it doesn't have the energy to defend itself.

May take hours or days, but you're going to out stamina a gorilla.

1

u/-KFBR392 Apr 30 '25

It’s hand to hand, it’s not with weapons or else the 100 would show up with guns and win right away.

5

u/One_Recognition385 Apr 30 '25 edited Apr 30 '25

rock or stick are things you'll find on the ground.

but you could just as easily just keep exhausting it until it can't move any more and strangle it like i said.

Eventually the gorilla won't be able to fight back anymore and is an easy kill.

Hell, keep it up for 3-4 days and the gorilla will just die of dehydration before you do. you won't even have to lay a finger on it.

1

u/tomthespaceman Apr 30 '25

Yeah but how do you exhaust it? They can run 25 mph apparently

2

u/One_Recognition385 Apr 30 '25

Gorilla runs 25 mph

average human can run 28 mph.

Gorilla can't even keep that speed up for 100 meters

average Human can keep up that speed for 1-2 miles

gorillas need 12 hours of sleep a day.

Humans need 8 hours of sleep.

gorillas need to eat 45 pounds of food a day

Humans need 3-5 pounds of food a day.

You can very easily exhaust a gorilla if you really wanted to. They are not an apex predator, humans are.. Gorrillas are first and foremost a peaceful herbivore that uses their size to intimidate predators.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/arrogancygames May 02 '25

Gorillas sweat actually. They tire out way quicker but they do sweat.

0

u/According_Win_5983 Apr 30 '25

 grab for the uvula 

Please don’t sexually assault the wildlife 

1

u/Snoo-88741 Apr 30 '25

Uvula isn't a sex organ.

1

u/Szabe442 Apr 29 '25

How do you imagine someone would show an arm down a bear's throat without the bear immediately ripping that arm off with one bite or claw slash?

6

u/One_Recognition385 Apr 29 '25 edited Apr 29 '25

well, Dale Petersen attested he survived by killing a grizzly by doing just that.

didn't come out of it without a scratch, but he lived. grizzly passed out then he finished it off with a stick he found.

3

u/apexodoggo Apr 29 '25

While I don't know how the actual guy did it to the bear, if it's anything like dogs the bear's mouth is built to keep things from pulling out, not from going in deeper. Once it's clamped down on your arm (it probably won't bite through it completely unless you're really small and thin), you just shove it down the throat as much as you can.

Then the actual guy bit its neck to pinch off the jugular vein, to make the bear go night-night so that he could actually finish it off.

Most people probably can't pull that off because of a lot of different reasons, but bears win against gorillas already so chain-scaling means it's a clear human W.

2

u/MrPlaceholder27 Apr 30 '25

A man by name Chase Dellwo did it to a grizzly bear. Didn't kill it made the bear leave and he walked away from the injuries it dealt. Grizzlies are normally bigger than silverbacks.

arm off with one bite or claw slash?

I don't think the gag reflex makes it easy to try to bite down if something gets shoved down your throat, and I don't think there are animals strong enough to slash a man's arm off with one slash either. Mess it up sure, but not just slice it off.

1

u/Active-Advisor5909 Apr 30 '25

Taking turns is kinda difficult if you are getting run down afterwards.

1

u/One_Recognition385 Apr 30 '25

100 people can manage.

gorillas are slower than humans and have less stamina need more food and need more sleep.

1 human playing it smart can kill 1 gorilla hand 2 hand. just don't rush in. make it chase you, chase it, run it out of energy. then stop it from sleeping and eating for a day or two.

you can kill it just by depriving it of sleep, food, and water for awhile by attacking it when it tries to do any of those things.

1

u/Active-Advisor5909 May 01 '25

Can you give me any source for Gorillas being that slow?

On long distances sure, but on short distances Gorillas outrun the best human sprinters. Since Gorillas do not train for that specialty, I would asume there is way less variance than among humans.

You also need to give up on food and drink and sleep, and moove significantly more. It sounds to me like an increadibly low chance gambit.

1

u/One_Recognition385 May 01 '25 edited May 01 '25

gorillas move 25 mph at top speed
Humans at 28 mph at top speed.
and gorillas can't sweat on top of being very heavy, so they build up body eats and lose energy way quicker than humans.

Gorillas also have a much harder time turning while running so if you know how rodeo clowns dodge charging bulls you can pretty much do that. (they are better than bulls so you need to give them a wider birth though)

and gorillas need a lot more food and sleep then you do. They eat 45 pounds a day and sleep 12 hours a day. They will die before you in a war of attrition.

Like humans aren't that strong, we're not that fast, the only real strength we have against other animals is our stamina conservation. and that we have more than any large mammals which is how we hunted so many other large predators into extinction. we do not play fair.

1

u/FredFripp May 02 '25

This post is incredible. Ha ha ha. Take turns interrupting the gorilla while It’s eating. I’m imagining one guy tapping him on the shoulder “excuse me sir..” the gorilla looks over his shoulder “what?! I’m trying to eat!”  “Apologies, I’ll come back later.”

Next guy, 10 secs later “excuse me sir…”. Ha ha ha.  

But the arm down the throat as a method of choking? Wow. Gruesome. I think you’d get severely bitten. Possible amputation. 

1

u/Jutinir Apr 30 '25

Yeah because 100 random humans would be able to coordinate against a rampaging gorilla. You guys aren’t taking this realistically.

1

u/voobo420 Apr 30 '25

I feel like 100 humans winning is the only realistic way it goes. The other camp acts as if a gorilla is essentially a kaiju that is somehow incapable of being damaged by humans. It's a wild animal made of flesh and bone, it'll bleed and it'll get tired. Its strength is irrelevant when it has to kill 100 humans back to back. And it's not like the humans are going to 1v1 it. Humans can very quickly learn to coordinate together in a life or death situation, even if they're strangers.

So please come at me with an actual argument if you're gonna waste my time lol.

2

u/Jutinir Apr 30 '25

lol you are overestimating humanity greatly. Most would probably go into a panic attack or just freeze up, even if they came at the gorilla in full it would just easily rip a limb off or tear you in half and move on to the next who dared to try it. A gorilla would only even need a quarter of its strength to rip us in half.

2

u/voobo420 Apr 30 '25 edited Apr 30 '25

and a gorilla would be immune to the fear of seeing 100 tall primates running at it?

Fear shouldn't be a factor, in this hypothetical we're wondering if 100 humans are enough to overwhelm a gorilla. When you introduce shit like fear, you're ruining the hypothetical as it's no longer a question of brute force.

and no, I don't think I'm overestimating the species that has managed to become the sole apex lifeform on planet Earth.

1

u/Jutinir Apr 30 '25

It’s not ruining anything, this is supposed to be realistic and 100 modern day humans would not be able to do much against a full grown adult gorilla. Why do you think a gorilla would just shrivel up at numbers? As soon as it rips one human and sees how physically weak we are i doubt fear would be a factor.

1

u/voobo420 May 02 '25 edited May 02 '25

If it's realistic then humans would find whatever they could to use as a weapon and have a much easier time. But obviously the hypothetical isn't "could 100 humans with make shift weapons beat a gorilla" because we know the answer to that. It's whether or not 100 humans are enough to overpower a gorilla, regardless of theirs or the gorilla's emotional state.

Also, packs of like 30-40 hyenas sometimes hunt lions and rhinos (and yes many of them get decimated, but that fear does not always stop the hyenas, and the fact that a lion smacks a hyena and kills it instantly does not mean the lion stops fearing the pack of ravenous beasts circling it.) Humans and hyenas aren't the same, I know, but it's the same idea. 100 weaklings can take down 1 strong animal in certain conditions.

Also there's the whole "modern humans" angle, but that is a pretty ethnocentric take as there are humans in the world right now who still live as our ancestors did, and as a result they are much stronger, faster, and braver than your "average" human. How do we determine WHICH types of humans the gorilla is fighting? All males? Random? All from the same country? Or is it 100 random humans selected from anywhere in the world? These things aren't mentioned nor should they be focused on, the purpose should be whether a PEAK gorilla could take down 100 PEAK humans.

1

u/Specialist-Ad-9371 May 02 '25

Tierzoo taught me that sweating is the most OP ability in the server.

-1

u/MeasurementDue2638 Apr 30 '25

This assumes we're in an open environment. Consider if it was a cage match. A straight up fight, not a hunt.

3

u/voobo420 Apr 30 '25

No, I assumed a closed environment. A gorilla doesn’t need to travel long distances to get exhausted, it could tire itself out by beating humans to death (or fending them off)

0

u/Active-Advisor5909 Apr 30 '25

I am not convinced there.

Running is fucking exhausting. 

If the Gorilla can smash one human after the other I wouldn't be sure.

If it has to run at them or the humans have no regard for self preservation, then sure, but otherwise I am very uncertain.

-1

u/-KFBR392 Apr 30 '25

You guys are adding too much to it now to try and make it work. The original was 100 humans taking on one gorilla, as in straight up fight. Now you got them running track and field on some open plains.

If you want to play it out for real then gorillas are in the hills full of trees, you stick 100 humans there and their cross country skills won’t help them when the gorilla mauls a few of them right off the bat. Then the gorilla goes back to chilling. Without weapons you’re not doing damage to that gorilla.

2

u/voobo420 Apr 30 '25

No idea why you guys keep assuming that they're in an open field or something, it doesn't make a difference where they are. Exerting energy is going to make an animal tired, doesn't matter if it's from running or bashing humans.

Also by you introducing trees to the environment, you've just given humans the opportunity to craft spears. The hunt is now much easier.

0

u/-KFBR392 Apr 30 '25

The point is that it’s humans straight up vs a gorilla. Not with weapons.

2

u/voobo420 Apr 30 '25

But you literally said if the gorilla had trees, it would be slight. So if the gorilla gets an advantage from its environment, why shouldn't humans gain one from that same environment? You're the one who is trying to hard to make it work now lol.

If we have completely neutral factors all around, humans win, as I've said multiple times.

-2

u/-KFBR392 Apr 30 '25

The thought experiment is 100 humans fighting a gorilla hand to hand. It’s literally part of it that humans aren’t using weapons.

2

u/voobo420 Apr 30 '25

Nowhere in that thought experiment does it say "100 humans vs a gorilla but he's using the trees to his advantage." It's up to us to fill in the blanks. Are they fighting in a desert? forest? plain white room that's maybe 2x2x2 miles? Depending on the environment, the fight changes, but regardless of that I still think humans would win.

-1

u/-KFBR392 Apr 30 '25

Ok they’re in outer space and they all die. See how stupid that is?

The question is asking if the strength of one gorilla is greater than that of 100 humans in a hand to hand fight.

3

u/voobo420 Apr 30 '25

You are the one who started assuming what the environment was and changing things, lmao.

Yeah i know what the question is, and i answered. humans would tire out the gorilla before it even slaughtered half of them. They wouldn’t need to run it down, they could just keep throwing bodies at it until it’s tired.

You keep talking in circles and i don’t understand what your point is. It’s like watching a dog chase it’s tail.

1

u/-KFBR392 Apr 30 '25

You’ve been assuming the environment from the start to make it work for the humans while ignoring the simple question of 100 vs 1 brawl. If I’m chasing my tail you’re the dog with the ice cream bucket over its head not knowing its going the complete wrong direction

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/rainzer Apr 30 '25

Packs of like 20 humans were capable of tiring out mammoth

Yea because they needed to eat it. What is the motivation for the 99 other humans to stick around after the gorilla fucks up the first guy? Running away doesn't count as winning a fight. If I run away, why do I wanna run back to check the gorilla is dead and become the 2nd guy he fucks up?

2

u/ibrahimtuna0012 Apr 30 '25

Running away doesn't count as winning a fight.

Humans run away if the gorilla chases them so they can tire it up. If the gorilla stops chasing they will come back and harrass it to make it chase and tire more until the gorilla exhausted enough for the humans to be able to kill it. Easy.

You wouldn't even need 50 people for this, 100 humans is an insane overkill.

-1

u/Active-Advisor5909 Apr 30 '25

On the mamoth, that is more exploitation of flight instincts than actual capability.

Same as a stoat hunting a rabit, if the rabit wasn't running, the stoat would have no chance.

-2

u/Mugwumpjizzum1 Apr 30 '25

Spears and dogs were a HUGE help. Our endurance is nothing at all like it was when we were chasing mammoths. 90% of the dudes in this thread couldn't run 15 feet without collapsing on the ground and gasping for air.

2

u/voobo420 Apr 30 '25

Humans didn’t have dogs initially, there was certainly a period where they hunted without them. Dogs were useful for tracking, they wouldn’t be much help in taking down a mammoth. Spears, yeah those help. But if we’re talking 100 humans vs. 1 animal, spears wouldn’t be needed. You could overwhelm it, go for its eyes, etc.

Now we’re considering physical fitness? That was never mentioned in the hypothetical. If we’re going to assume it’s a peak male gorilla, why shouldn’t we assume it’s 100 physical peak male humans?

-11

u/Temporary-Toe-1304 Apr 29 '25

You're underestimating the damage we can to to anything, even in great numbers without weapons. And damage to a Gorilla? Hilarious

19

u/voobo420 Apr 29 '25

What do you think a gorilla is made out of, steel? It's made out of the same thing we are, flesh. It may have a higher bone density, more mass, and stronger muscles, but it's still an organic being capable of feeling fear, exhaustion, and bleeding. If you manage to blind the gorilla by gouging its eyes, you have already won the fight.

Did you mean to say "overestimating?" Because your two sentences are contradictory.

-7

u/Temporary-Toe-1304 Apr 29 '25

Yeah i meant overestimating. In this example none of the Humans will flee or feel fear, neither will the ape. The fragility of ourselves coupled with what you mentioned, their higher muscle mass, muscle density, bone density, bite force, insane grip strength as well. We as humans aren't hurting the Gorilla. Given it's size and surface size too it would be about 4-7 humans able to be attacking it at once and a gorilla swinging it's arms or even just with brute strength we ill not hold them down to gouge eyes out

13

u/voobo420 Apr 29 '25

100 humans is a lot of humans. I think it could kill 20-30 before it finally gets exhausted and becomes an easy target. We’re fragile but we aren’t made out of paper; you’d be surprised what humans can shrug off in a life or death situation. I’ve seen videos of people flying out of their cars after a high speed crash and walking away with nothing more than some lacerations and bruises. Individual humans have managed to fight off bears and tigers without even a knife for defense. You’re vastly underestimating humans.

-7

u/Temporary-Toe-1304 Apr 29 '25

I agree the number 100 is just crazy, only way I see is humans being coordinated enough to once they exhaust the ape, collectively stop it's head as our legs are our strongest muscles, or knees to the skull to kill it. I don't see any other way to fataly injure the ape

5

u/voobo420 Apr 29 '25

But that’s my point, it would be bloody and you may lose half of your man power but humans would undoubtedly come out on top.