[deleted]
Scientists 'speechless' at Arctic fox's epic trek
31–40 of 99 posts
Re: Scientists 'speechless' at Arctic fox's epic trek
#32Wow, I assumed that there was so much water surrounding Greenland that it would be impossible for a fox to swim or get there by themselves. Any idea how much of the path to Greenland from the poles and Canada is covered by ice and how far is pure water?
Here's the sea ice extent this year: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/files/2019/04/Figure1.png
Fascinating! Thanks a lot!
Re: Scientists 'speechless' at Arctic fox's epic trek
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have to catch them first...
Well but that's the thing - we can out walk a vast majority of animals on this planet. Early human hunters were successful partially because they could chase their prey for days if needed until it collapsed from exhaustion. We might have not have the same speed as some of the animals, but human endurance is unparalleled in the animal world.
Unparalleled in the _land_ animal world perhaps. But there are stories of birds that fly for months at a time. Penguins (in water), ostrich's and camels can also achieve pretty unparalleled things wrt endurance. And who knows about things in the sea...
Re: Scientists 'speechless' at Arctic fox's epic trek
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
why? why do humans nowadays need this skill?
For the same reason that you should be able to set up a tent, cook a meal, write some software and repair some piece of kit that you need. It's the kind of thing that comes in handy all the time. Of course you could rely on all kinds of technical gizmos to cover you but that stuff can break, run out of battery power, be lost and so on. Good luck finding your way out of the national park with your empty phone.
> Good luck finding your way out of the national park with your empty phone.
That's why the national park is full of clearly marked trails.
If you're backpacking through unmarked wilderness, you need a navigation system, and you know you need it. That's 0% of people to several significant figures.
Re: Scientists 'speechless' at Arctic fox's epic trek
#35It’s fascinating to see. But what about the plastic pollution as a result of this (from the GPS tracker that will now become permanent plastic garbage). I don’t mean to say the pollution isn’t worth the fox study. But why isn’t anyone asking if it is? Who determines, or at which point do we say, yes this study is worth creating this amount of pollution?
you are asking.
Re: Scientists 'speechless' at Arctic fox's epic trek
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have to catch them first...
Well but that's the thing - we can out walk a vast majority of animals on this planet. Early human hunters were successful partially because they could chase their prey for days if needed until it collapsed from exhaustion. We might have not have the same speed as some of the animals, but human endurance is unparalleled in the animal world.
Human endurance is unparalleled in the animal world when the temperature is high. At low temperatures some canids and horses can do as well or better, but they can't shed heat efficiently.
Re: Scientists 'speechless' at Arctic fox's epic trek
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the same reason that you should be able to set up a tent, cook a meal, write some software and repair some piece of kit that you need. It's the kind of thing that comes in handy all the time. Of course you could rely on all kinds of technical gizmos to cover you but that stuff can break, run out of battery power, be lost and so on. Good luck finding your way out of the national park with your empty phone.
> Good luck finding your way out of the national park with your empty phone. That's why the national park is full of clearly marked trails. If you're backpacking through unmarked wilderness, you need a navigation system, and you know you need it. That's 0% of people to several significant figures.
I assume you haven't gone hiking in many places. In national parks and similar areas the trails are often vague, poorly marked, and easily confused with animal paths. Get just a few steps off the path and it's easy to become completely disoriented, especially in dense forest where you can't see anything but trees.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/hawaii-hiker-amanda-eller-apologi...
Re: Scientists 'speechless' at Arctic fox's epic trek
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
why? why do humans nowadays need this skill?
For the same reason that you should be able to set up a tent, cook a meal, write some software and repair some piece of kit that you need. It's the kind of thing that comes in handy all the time. Of course you could rely on all kinds of technical gizmos to cover you but that stuff can break, run out of battery power, be lost and so on. Good luck finding your way out of the national park with your empty phone.
Hah, tents. Those can be broken or lost, utterly unreliable. Best just cover yourself in leaves when the rains come.
Sarcasm, of course. But this manly-man "gotta be self sufficient" thing always strikes me as so peculiarly limited. Why assume that this piece of gear will be lost but not that one? Why should we believe that, when all the restaurants have gone and civilization has collapsed, the grocery stores will still be open? That by the time a software engineer cannot be found at all their skills will be at all relevant?
I get being a well-rounded person and the desire to be useful in a pinch, but let's not delude ourselves about how prepared any of us really are for The End Of The World. Certainly none of us should be getting up on soapboxes about it.
Re: Scientists 'speechless' at Arctic fox's epic trek
#39This makes me wonder: could a human who is totally attuned to this cold environment do the same thing at the same speed? This would mean not being able to get any supplies, carry clothing and tent if needed and basically live off the land. Can humans do that?
Yes, speed runs of the PCT (with more mountainous terrain) at faster paces than this are common.
Re: Scientists 'speechless' at Arctic fox's epic trek
#40 You might also like:
- Polar bear shot dead in Iceland
I guess this is as good a place as any to ask – what's the value of interrupting the article halfway through to link me to other articles? It's something I expect from the likes of Buzzfeed, but now the BBC is doing it too. Did they think I'd get bored halfway through?