In the intro, we have this bit: "We're at the top of the food chain. That means that literally nothing in the world can successfully prey on humans (except maybe other humans)." Disregarding even that there's no such thing as a "food chain" (nor do food networks have a "top"), this is still factually incorrect. I don't want to be excessively bold in editing the header, though, so: Does anyone have any suggestions for how to retool this?
Hide / Show Replies
The concepts of a food chain and its top do most definitively exist. The fix I would use would be something like "We're at the top of the food chain. That means that literally nothing in the world does prey on humans (except maybe other humans)."
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
In general, is this trope any monster that eats another monster, or just monsters that eat humans (and any monsters above that)?
Because we've got a lot of examples here of monsters that eat monsters that don't eat humans. e.g. Angel on EVA and EVA on Angel eating in Evangelion.
Would the Predators that hunt Predators from Predators could as an example of this (even though they don't eat them)?
Linking to a past Trope Repair Shop thread that dealt with this page: Is this clear enough?
, started by Ezekiel on May 4th 2011 at 3:25:30 AM
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman