The theory is based on an assumption - drawn from novels apparently - that vampires are the 'suck you dry' variety. This seriously impedes the resulting theory. Animal behavior - for the sake of argument- usually balances out food supply versus predators. They move on or they adapt to different patterns or die off. While no great supporter of the vampire as truth concept - this assumption should be noted.
Yes, as I read the article it became funnier and funnier. The initial argument was severely flawed. It didn't think of Vampires as a real creature working within the confines of the natural world. It would be a predator/prey scenario that should take into account appetite, the fact that humans are primarily diurnal and vampires nocturnal, and human ability to fight off their attacker - to say nothing of dumb luck. Just look at any super-predator and see how hard they work to eat so little.
Post a Comment