Wrong again. Using your logic we would be significantly stronger than chimpanzees (average male weight 90 - 115 pounds). Not even close!
Location of muscle attachments is part of it, but chimpanzees are significantly stronger than humans in spite of their smaller weight.
Wrong again. Using your logic we would be significantly stronger than chimpanzees (average male weight 90 - 115 pounds). Not even close!
Location of muscle attachments is part of it, but chimpanzees are significantly stronger than humans in spite of their smaller weight.
Experts agree that muscle is the same for all vertibrate animals, e.g. Knut Nielson's, "Scaling, Why is Animal size So Important", Cambridge Univ Press, 1984
"It appears that the maximum force or stress that can be exerted by any muscle is inherent in the structure of the muscle filaments. The maximum force is roughly 4 to 4 kgf/cm2 cross section of muscle (300 - 400 kN/m2). This force is body-size independent and is the same for mouse and elephant muscle. The reason for this uniformity is that the dimensions of the thick and thin muscle filaments, and also the number of cross-bridges between them are the same. In fact the structure of mouse muscle and elephant muscle is so similar that a microscopist would have difficulty identifying them except for a larger number of mitrochondria in the smaller animal. This uniformity in maximum force holds not only for higher vertebrates, but for many other organisms, including at least some, but not all invertebrates."
The comparison between humans and apes is usually done wrong; unlike the case with all monkeys and apes, our legs are the major limbs so that the comparison is between our legs and the chimp's arms. Want to see how lame chimps really are? Try getting one of them to run a competitive 440 or take on a competent karate artist in a fight.
Aside from that, the comparison in the article did not involve apes; the contrast was between a top human athlete who works out with weights 25 hours a day and uses food to flavor his dyanabol with, and a herbivore (sauropod) whose body is mainly gut and digestive system. There's no possible way the herbivore figures to be stronger on a per pound basis.
Not really actually. Show me a chimpanzee that can run a marathon.
Almost all of a human's strength is in its legs and a lot of that is wrapped up in endurance as well.
Sure animals are stronger. No land animal is faster over long distance.