this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2025
458 points (99.6% liked)

Mildly Interesting

20041 readers
696 users here now

This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it's too interesting, it doesn't belong. If it's not interesting, it doesn't belong.

This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh.. what do we know?

Just post some stuff and don't spam.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

There are only five well-documented fatal lightning strikes on giraffes between 1996 and 2010. But due to the population of the species being just 140,000 during this time, it makes for about 0.003 lightning deaths per thousand giraffes each year. This is 30 times the equivalent fatality rate for humans.

Source

Pic by Luca Galuzzi

all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mtchristo@lemm.ee 3 points 14 hours ago

OK now give us tall people's probability as well. I am curious

[–] Apocalypteroid@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

Have we tried running copper strips down the side of their necks?

[–] cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

How about the fact that humans live all across the world, even in places where you don't really have lightnings?

Wouldn't we have to compare the number of humans hit by lightning, only in the areas where giraffes live?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_lightning

The articles only compares to humans in the US... This is very unscientific especially comming from this media!

[–] lengau@midwest.social 1 points 1 day ago

While that's true and what I'm about to say could be legend rather than reality, I grew up being told that giraffes also tend to go to the top of a hill during storms, making them more likely to be struck by lightning.

[–] hank_the_tank66@lemmy.world 80 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I highly doubt that...you give me like, I dunno, let's say 5 people, and a catapult, and I bet you I can hit a giraffe before it gets struck by lightning.

Even more confident if you give me a people-sized potato cannon.

[–] cholesterol@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Ah, the new Lemmy giraffaroo?

[–] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It's the old !lemmaroo@lemmy.world at this point.

You can edit your giraffaroo to point to this link: https://feddit.org/comment/1716202

[–] tostiman@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

We should start a chain on Lemmy

[–] crawancon@lemm.ee 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

can we catapult people in order of their current wealth hoarding?

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

Only into an active volcano

[–] TaTTe@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

But that's the thing, you're NOT out there with your catapult, so the statistics still hold true. Assuming you were given the catapult and I was given a giant tesla coil, I believe I would still be able to zap 30x more giraffes than you could hit with your pathetic catapult.

[–] Peter_Arbeitslos@feddit.org 16 points 2 days ago

Does it make a difference if I stand in front of the giraffe with a blue card while there's a zebra climbing onto the giraffes head?

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 36 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Isn't it because it's illegal for us to hit them?

[–] zipzoopaboop@lemmynsfw.com 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I was thinking "who has the balls to walk up and slap a giraffe"

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Can't reach that high.

[–] recapitated@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

why you little

[–] Thcdenton@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago
[–] Frozengyro@lemmy.world 19 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Insane to think there's only 140k of them. Seems super low for some reason.

[–] RunawayFixer@lemmy.world 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Wild mammals only make up 4% of the total mammal biomass, and that 4% includes whales. We're just not leaving a lot of room for nature anymore.

[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This is surprising to me, I grew up in a rural area where deer far outnumbered people. Also you'd think despite their small size the sheer number of rodents in the wild would increase the biomass by more than that. There are large amounts of the earth that is still uninhabited by humans, in mountains, cold climates, islands and keys, oceans, lakes, etc. I'm sure the scientists are right, I'm just shocked.

[–] RunawayFixer@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

This is just mammals, so most water creatures aren't being counted, which is going to be the majority of all animal biomass. So those waters you mention are mostly being ignored, but for living on land and for explaining land usage, just comparing the mammals is more informative.

I suspect that for my country, if you'd add human + pig + cattle biomass together, that you'd end up with about 99% of the biomass of all land animals. The remaining 1% is probably going to be mostly chickens. Other livestock, pets or wild animals will be lost in the rounding error. It's only a suspicion though, I can't find actual numbers straight away.

Edit: I did find some numbers after all: humans + pigs + cattle are 99.9% of the mammal biomass in my country. It's actually worse than I thought it was going to be. I can't find a number for chickens + birds, just the mammals.

[–] naeap@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Holy fuck, more biomass in cattle than chicken?

May I ask what country?

[–] RunawayFixer@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Is it possible that you're thinking of slaughterhouse biomass? I was talking about the biomass of concurrently alive animals and I would expect just milk cows to outweigh chickens in a lot of countries.

My guesstimations are for Flanders, the northern half of Belgium. There's also a lot of chickens, but pigs + cattle weigh more per animal + live longer, which is why I expect them to weigh significantly more than the chickens at any given time. It's not sustainable in any way, I read once that about 90% of the livestock food is imported, 2/3rd of that from outside Europe.

[–] naeap@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 day ago

Ah yeah, I was including slaughterhouse biomass

That explains it, thanks!

[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Lakes and rivers still have otters and beavers, etc. Not huge biomass but still relevant. Oceans have all sorts of mammals, most of the largest ocean creatures. Only 30% of land is inhabited by humans and our agriculture but land and freshwater is only 29% of earth and 71% of earth is oceans. 30% of 29% is like 8.5%. Once you start factoring in how little of the earth we actually inhabit or our agriculture, it is pretty surprising how heavily we dominate the mammal kingdom.

[–] naeap@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 days ago

It's even more surprising, how we can fuck up the planet in this way, although we aren't even everywhere

But, where we are, we disturb, fuck up, and only look for our own comfort.
As the supposedly intelligent race on the planet, I would expect much more from us, than just survival - and even that we don't get right, as it seems, that it over consumption kills the resources we need
Yeah, really intelligent...

I'm not saying, that another dominant animal would do it better, but I've really much higher standards, when it comes to people, as we have the ability for empathy as well, but mostly we got the power.

Seems we can't move intellectually from being just animal and fulfilling our own needs

[–] DemBoSain@midwest.social 19 points 2 days ago

This is mostly caused by Africans wiring up giraffes for use as aerials to pull in distant TV stations.

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Also take 30x longer to clear their throat. Human: Ahem. Giraffe: Ahem ahem ahem ahem ahem ahem...

[–] savvywolf@pawb.social 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Fun nature fact: Their horns act like lighting rods to provide a safe path to ground so as to keep the electricity away from their internal wiring and plumbing.

[–] NegentropicBoy@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] pdxfed@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

If you didn't wire your giraffes like this I don't know how you made it past apprenticeship and into the union. Imagine.

[–] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Who’s out here punching giraffes?

[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] D_C@lemm.ee 3 points 2 days ago

Yes, toads will hit giraffes more than humans. They get mesmerised and hypnotised by the long necks, they can't help themselves but to attack.

[–] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Also, according to many big game hunters, they are the tastiest animal. Apparently giraffe meat has a delightful sweetness to it.

Sadly, giraffe ranching hasn't caught on. But maybe once lab grown meat is widely available someone will finally bring it to the masses.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 3 points 2 days ago

They taste something like bald eagle, with a hint of condor.

[–] neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Is it because of the spots?

[–] bhamlin@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

It's their feet. They have four, so have twice as many as humans. But lightning works exponentially.

[–] pdxfed@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

what kind of lightning works exponentially?

[–] Deathray5@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 1 day ago

If they're referring to how the cross sectional area scales exponentially with the radius it almost makes sense

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 1 points 2 days ago

This is why we find lots of well preserved dynosours.