I saw a YouTube clip today where a python was fighting with a cobra on a street in India. The python was wrapped around the cobra, but the cobra got in a bite. They were pulled apart, and the cobra went to a zoo and the python was released in the wild where it’s survival after a cobra bite was seriously in question.
This clip reminded of an old TV show "Animal Face-Off" on Animal Planet which fictitiously pitted two animals against each other and speculated on which animal would survive. I think in real life, often both animals lose. In the case of the snakes, if not pulled apart, the python would probably have choked the cobra to death and then later also died from the poison.
Survival in real life is tough. It is why predators look for easy prey. They look for the sick, the slow or the newly born. The strongest lion can be brought down by infection from the smallest scratch inflicted in taking down dinner.
As a result of this show, my youngest son who was about eight would constantly ask, “Who would win?”
“Who would win a crocodile or a bear?”
“Who would win an eagle or a raccoon?”
Who would win a great white shark or an electric eel?”
Then we would argue for one animal or the other. Usually it came down to venue.
“If the crocodile was stranded in the forest, the bear would easily kill it. If they met up when the bear was crossing a river the bear would be toast.”
“If the eagle surprised the raccoon out in the open it would probably win. If the raccoon got a good shot in to the eagle’s wing, the raccoon would kill the grounded bird.”
The shark and the eel? “Would the shark bite cut the eels circuit? If not they would probably both die.”
I was planning to make a point with this post, skillfully applying it to politics, or economics, or sports and making some great intellectual statement, but…I got nothing.
I do miss that “Who would win” game with my eight year old who is now seventeen.