Whenever anyone tells you 97 percent of scientists agree on man-made global warming, first, question the study that came up with that figure (it’s highly flawed) and then check out any of hundreds of stories in the mainstream media that tell us what scientists are up to. Remember when the U.S. government chipped in $1.5 million so scientists could study shrimp running on a treadmill?
Now some scientists have noticed that the distribution of shells in one hermit crab population showed that shells were not distributed equally, making hermit crabs one of the first animals to experience wealth inequality.
The distribution of shells in one hermit crab population was surprisingly similar to the distribution of wealth in human societies.
That may make hermit crabs one of the first animals known to experience wealth inequality. https://t.co/aiQWNuK1TV pic.twitter.com/g1Cm40Y4f0
— The New York Times (@nytimes) December 14, 2019
The New York Times reports:
A study that will be published next month in the journal Physica A found that the distribution of these shells in one hermit crab population was surprisingly similar to the distribution of wealth in human societies.
That may make hermit crabs one of the first animals known to experience wealth inequality.
…
Dr. [Ivan] Chase thinks the resemblance between crab and human inequality might come from similarities between crab vacancy chains and the ways people pass on wealth. While smaller crabs don’t exactly inherit their wealth from bigger crabs, the largest shells are a scarce resource that only a few crabs are privileged enough to get their claws on.
And the point of this is?
This is because crabs have never tried *real* socialism. I think they tried crab communism years and years and years ago, but even that wasn't real communism.
— Jean Paul Zodeaux (@JeanPaulZodeaux) December 14, 2019
THE TOP 1% OF CRABS OWN MORE WEALTH THAN THE BOTTOM 99% https://t.co/8M919tGQjJ
— Logan Hall (@loganclarkhall) December 14, 2019
I hate to break it to you but every lifeform competes for resources and territory. Inequality ain’t just for humans and hermit crabs.
— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) December 14, 2019
Yes because animals never fight for limited resources ?
— Dani VasNormandy (@DanneskjoldDani) December 14, 2019
Are you serious? Many animal societies operate this way. For example, in a wolf pack, the Alpha wolf has access to females, betas do not, there is no equitable distribution.
— Brent Allen Thale (@BattyBlogger) December 14, 2019
Don’t lions have a bigger wealth inequality? Female lions do all the hunting but male lions get to eat first… male lions are the OG bourgeoisie profiting off the work of the proletariat.
— John Johnson (@JJJohnson_Mogul) December 14, 2019
It’s called nature. Where everything isn’t equal or fair. Get over it.
— Preaus (@Preaus) December 14, 2019
Or, it's just the natural order of existence on earth.
— Tango Foxtrot (@TFinn82) December 14, 2019
They are exhausting. So broken.
— brownOUT (@JHWalz32) December 14, 2019
Must be because of institutionalized molluskism.
— Barney the Magasaur (@SoberPurpleDino) December 14, 2019
— Mark Harrison (@Markhars) December 14, 2019
Congratulations to the The New York Times for learning that hierarchies are naturally occurring and aren't socially constructed. You've got this @nytimes, you'll get there!
— Connor Rothbard (@ConnorRothbard) December 14, 2019
“We are running out of stupid ways to call attention to inequality. Any ideas?”
Wellll…..???— GregEsq (@GregEsq) December 14, 2019
Communism for crabs now. Those with shells will be the first against the wall when the aquatic revolution comes. https://t.co/W5uS3N81qw
— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) December 14, 2019
Are you guys trying to argue for some kind of crab socialism?
— Jon Yahraus (@jonisnotameme) December 14, 2019
I say we split their shells. Take a percentage and redistribute
— J. S. (@S0T066) December 14, 2019
The only answer is to forgive all hermit crab debt.
— ? (@ItsCuckooWorld) December 14, 2019
Well journalism has died in this country
— Free American (@surefire87) December 14, 2019
Shut up please. Just shut up.
— True Conservative (@AlphaRightDog00) December 14, 2019
literally shut up
— natalie ? naeri (@naeriface) December 14, 2019
Stop trying to insert human morality into the animal kingdom.
— Jack: Pastor of the Church of Serious Sam (@ChaosBahamut) December 14, 2019
Legendary Journalisming
— MrMchy (@swampdonk24) December 14, 2019
This is really stupid.
— John Thorsson (@thorsson_john) December 14, 2019
Related:
Vox features ‘study’ counting the number of animal deaths in celebrity cookbooks https://t.co/l5oxh2229o
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) May 9, 2019
Join the conversation as a VIP Member