2007-09-04 01:30:39 · 26 answers · asked by Smoochy Poochy 6 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Zoology
I said MOST come on folks read the question.
2007-09-04 01:51:32 · update #1
Humans didn't used to live very long. The average life span for humans in ancient Rome was 22 years. During the 1800's the average life span for people in North America was 40. Though some did live into their 80's, most did not live to see their first birthday.
The reason for longer human longevity in developed nations is due to adundant food, proper housing, sanitation, medicine, health care, technology, and social services.
For the same reasons, even our pets are living longer.
2007-09-04 02:47:33 · answer #1 · answered by Suzi 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
There is no direct answer that has been proven itself to become a scientific theory, thus a reason to how you can base life-spans on. Not yet.
But what IS a known fact is that the metabolisms speed rate of the animal strongly influences the amount that species shall be able to live (in completely idealistic conditions when getting old and weaker does not upgrade you to the food chain).
It is much harder for a dog to die when he or she is raised in a domestic nurture. Thus many dogs are obligated to be put to sleep from their old age rather than their dying from their old age. Had they been in the wildlife they would have not lived half as long due to their bodies no longer being able to afford being so weakened?
A life span is more related to how fast the species “wastes” their body, their body’s resources. The Tortoise for example has very well set its life to adapt to very undemanding speed and agility. Its aging is not only slower, but as it ages; this old age harms it a lot less than it would a wolf or a badger.
Try to think it as an allowance and that we all spend it but those that spend it fastest are broke sooner. If you live in Beverly Hills and you are spending already fast… then with the very little you have left, you can never really manage to survive. But if you lived in a place with much lower set prices… then you have a lot longer expectancy to survive with the little amount you have left.
So to do the math: the ones that spend that money least, AND live in an affordable neighbourhood will eventually be the ones that shall have an amount of the allowance longest.
Hope this helps
2007-09-04 06:05:13 · answer #2 · answered by blackdidthis 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's just the nature of things - the way they were designed. Many animals reach maturity in less than a year and start producing their own young. This wouldn't be a biological necessity, to perpetuate the species, if they had a long life span like ours.
2007-09-04 01:38:32 · answer #3 · answered by bluebell 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
nicely...the thought of animal years is in basic terms stupid. They got here up with that concept to verify animals to people. certainty of the priority is previously scientific advancements human beings lived an common of 20-30 years. In a nut-shell...that's what surpassed off: there have been huge scientific advancements for people extending their lives extensively, in spite of the fact that, there have not been huge scientific advancements for animals.
2016-10-17 21:58:13 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Without going into a long drawn out scenario... "if" your heart beat as fast as a rabbits or a dogs how long do you think you would live? Animals that have a slower heart beat for their mass tend to live longer than those that don't. Example... the elephant... the turtle.
2007-09-04 01:36:37 · answer #5 · answered by yah_ra 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Science doesn't really know.
There are certain things, like trees that it is very hard to get a life expectancy for.
Most things die becasue they get ill, not because they just wear out.
Generally speaking, if you are in the "food source" position on the food chain you live a shorter life than if you are in the "eater" position.
2007-09-04 01:38:09 · answer #6 · answered by Joseph G 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Most animals survive for the same number of heartbeats. Some like to get it over with quickly.
2007-09-04 01:34:51 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Because they reach age of reproduction more quickly. Evolutionary pressures do not yield longevity beyond the point to reproduce and raise young.
2007-09-04 01:37:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
life expectancy tends to related to size, as humans are fairly large they live a long time compared to other, smaller mammals
2007-09-04 02:08:31 · answer #9 · answered by Jody W 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They were hunted to extinction because of food but animals like the cow and the pig were bred before they were slaughtered for food.
2007-09-05 22:31:49 · answer #10 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋