Slashdot Mirror


Lemming Population Flux Solved: Mass Suicide Not to Blame

quogmire writes "Australia's ABC reports that biologists from the Universities of Finland and Freiburg (Germany) have finally solved the question of lemming population fluctuations once thought to be caused by lemmings mass-suiciding by plunging off cliffs. 'Lemming populations, they say, surge spectacularly and fall just as quickly, thanks to the combined feasting of four predators: the stoat, arctic fox, snowy owl and a seabird called the long-tailed skua.' The original article (Login required) is published in Science."

181 comments

  1. Don't worry if you ever lose Lemmings off a cliff by alex_ant · · Score: 3, Funny

    There will always be another sequel.

  2. good! by Dorothy+86 · · Score: 5, Funny

    well, at least now I know that its just not God pushing the mushroom cloud button!

    1. Re:good! by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1

      Don't tell Homeland security. Next thing you know we'll be invading Scandinavia.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    2. Re:good! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And this pointless article was posted on /. why?

    3. Re:good! by LeoDV · · Score: 1

      Isn't it obvious -- so everyone and their mom could make bad, one line Lemmings game jokes. Some of them are funny and I've got a couple in mind, but when it's just so easy I pass up.

  3. I thought it was by Phosphor3k · · Score: 5, Funny

    because I keep clicking the bomb icon and blowing them up?

  4. Anyone else think this was about computer Lemmings by BigDish · · Score: 0

    When I read the slashdot bit, but before I read the article itself, I thought the article was reffering to the computer Lemmings in the video game. Anyone else think that?

  5. Pingus by MooCows · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why study Lemmings when you can study Pingus?

    --
    The path I walk alone is endlessly long.
    30 minutes by bike, 15 by bus.
    1. Re:Pingus by Doomrat · · Score: 1

      Because it's a vastly inferior game when compared to the original. Playability was entirely scratched in favour of sticking an oversized geek mascot in there, in turn sacrificing all of the magic, atmosphere, well-designed levels and proportion which made the idea work in the first place.

    2. Re:Pingus by Kent+Recal · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hum.
      I played some early pingus-demo (4 levels i think) and I didn't find it _that_ bad at all.
      Ofcourse it's not the original lemmings and most of the levels lacked the "Doh!"-effect of the original, but it is definately worth a look also for those who played the original lemmings back and forth.

      Post-It-Side-Note: I didn't really like the original lemmings past Lemmings II. Some of the bonus packs (X-Mas Lemmings etc.) were nice. But starting with Lemmings III they put in so many new modes (and very bad ones, too, like the "Jump"-Lemming and others that depended on SplitSecondMouseclickTiming(tm)) that it ruined the great "usability" known from Lemmings I+II.
      In that light pingus has a really nice balance of just the right number of not-so-over-the-edge (bazooka-lemming anyone?) modes.

      Another-Really-Small-Sticky-Note:
      One mode that's really been missing from all Lemmings-Clones I know would be
      the "PacMan"-mode, tho... ;-)

    3. Re:Pingus by Doomrat · · Score: 1

      I (and probably any Lemmings fan ever) would agree that the series died after Lemmings II. You're certainly not alone there.

    4. Re:Pingus by wo1verin3 · · Score: 1

      agreed, the Lemmings 3D really disappointed me.

      Worms 3D seems to be pretty cool though if you like that sorta game, download the demo, I'll be buying it when its out.

    5. Re:Pingus by Kent+Recal · · Score: 1

      Well, if they only made a linux-version, I'd definately give it a shot...

      I'm curious if they could actually make worms "work" in 3d. Lemmings3d was so awful, I didn't even bother to finish level 1. (Playtime: ~45 minutes)

    6. Re:Pingus by wo1verin3 · · Score: 1

      Well the 3D aspect is cool, but once you've set your view you don't need to spent a hundred hours rotating the camera every which way. I'm not sure if it's anything you can narrow down, just has a good feel to it once you un-invert the mouse which is inverted by default.

    7. Re:Pingus by yourmom16 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Unfortunately most worms(Slammer, Blaster, SoBig, etc) are for Windows.

      --
      "We have got to make Stan understand the importance of voting, because he'll definitely vote for our guy." - South Park
    8. Re:Pingus by Black+Hitler · · Score: 1

      Lemmings Revolutions was pretty good.

    9. Re:Pingus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? I hated the pointless orgy scene in Lemmings Reloaded and swore off Lemmings Revolutions altogether.

    10. Re:Pingus by Monkelectric · · Score: 1

      My g/f bought lemmings 3D for 4.99 at staples, and she still got *ripped off*. If I saw a psygnosis developer lying in the street bleeding I'd kick him as I walked by.

      --

      Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

  6. Bastards! by Doomrat · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Thanks scientists, for destroying the magic behind my favourite game.

  7. This is good news... by dauvis · · Score: 5, Funny

    I thought it was because I should have had one build that bridge across the chasm. I didn't consider that the game had predators as well.

  8. Suicide theory is a fraud! by Chmarr · · Score: 5, Informative

    What? There are STILL people that believe that lemmings mass suicide?! Geez, what a hoax.

    It's well known, by me at least, that the whole 'lemming suicide' thing was something that Disney cooked up during their 'bad documentary' era. In this case the lemmings were hearded off a cliff by the documentary crew, and was filmed as a 'mass suicide'.

    I've seen some pretty amusing/sad documentaries that came out of Disney, including one that had the antics of a Jaguar eating various creatrues. It was OBVIOUS that it was a jaguar in a rather well done habitat where they threw in various animals, mostly eels, for the jaguar to attack. It was exceptionally amusing, but sad, too, that they thought to do something like this and pass it off as truth.

    1. Re:Suicide theory is a fraud! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yep. Here's a Snopes link for those who believe that everything that isn't on that site to be true:

      http://www.snopes.com/disney/films/lemmings.htm

    2. Re:Suicide theory is a fraud! by vidarh · · Score: 5, Informative

      You're partly wrong. The lemming suicides were NOT cooked up by Disney - the idea of lemmings mass suicides preceeded their documentary by half a century at least. Disney faked their documentary because they believed the mass suicide story but they didn't manage to get any film of it, and instead of questioning whether the suicides actually happened they faked a scene to illustrate what they thought was supposed to happen.

    3. Re:Suicide theory is a fraud! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Yep. Here's a Snopes link for those who believe that everything that isn't on that site to be true:
      http://www.snopes.com/disney/films/lemmings .htm

      Actually thats called a URL, here is a link.

    4. Re:Suicide theory is a fraud! by giblfiz · · Score: 1

      well you know, I get all of my information from video games.
      Don't penguins kill themselves too?

    5. Re:Suicide theory is a fraud! by SiliconBateman · · Score: 1

      Surely that is even worse... conforming to the orthodox methodology rater than carrying out an independent investigation (quenching the consumers bait for blood rather than educating it)...

      Although this was a long time ago, Disney's morals still seem to wallow at this level.

      --
      -- Alchohol is a hard drug. Cannabis is a soft drug.
    6. Re:Suicide theory is a fraud! by vidarh · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I think you can safely assume that Disney treated a lot of their "documentaries" as they would any fiction: Write the script, and go out and film the scenes. And when you expect to follow a script and nature starts being difficult, they did what they could with the same persistence as they'd fake weather or scenery for any other movie.

      I guess they thought it was only the end product that mattered.

    7. Re:Suicide theory is a fraud! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quite! Who does Disney think they are, Fox News?

    8. Re:Suicide theory is a fraud! by yourmom16 · · Score: 1

      How is this informative? There is a link to that page in the article.

      --
      "We have got to make Stan understand the importance of voting, because he'll definitely vote for our guy." - South Park
    9. Re:Suicide theory is a fraud! by MasonMcD · · Score: 1

      Right, and there's also the bizarre feature that must be attributed to lemmings that doesn't exist anywhere else in nature: some innate sense of altruism to maintain *group* fitness (i.e. to relieve population pressures such as food/mate scarcity) by sacrificing yourself, as opposed to regular old *individual* fitness (i.e. fuck you, I saw her *first* - off the cliff you go *shove*).

      There is a possibly confusing scenario of kinship selection (eg putting yourself in danger by protecting your offspring, denying yourself food for your brother/sister/children, etc.) that under some circumstances might be mistaken for group selection behaviors, but all have been attributed to the kinship ties among the study subjects.

      I mean, think about it. How in God's name does an inheritable trait for suicide get passed down?

    10. Re:Suicide theory is a fraud! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      conforming to the orthodox methodology rater than carrying out an independent investigation

      media vs scientists.

      They set out to tell a story, not test a hypothesis.

    11. Re:Suicide theory is a fraud! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I mean, think about it. How in God's name does an inheritable trait for suicide get passed down?

      It shares genes with an inheritable trait to breed earlier.

    12. Re:Suicide theory is a fraud! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is "herded" and not "hearded."

  9. sounds like exceprt from formula mystery novel by iggymanz · · Score: 4, Funny

    those Disney lemmings didn't commit suicide, they were MURDERED! *gasp*

    1. Re:sounds like exceprt from formula mystery novel by Mattcelt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In fact, they were. My sister met someone who worked on the project. He said that if you actually look closely at the Disney footage, you can see the lemmings trying to swim back to the shore! They were apparently taking them and throwing them off by the bucketful...

      The person's excuse was that he was a poor college student and needed the money. Makes one wonder what other atrocities have been committed by poor college students? *grin*

    2. Re:sounds like exceprt from formula mystery novel by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Makes one wonder what other atrocities have been committed by poor college students?

      Mostly, eating a lot of ramen.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  10. Or do it the Disney way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean, dumping lemmings of a cliff from a truck just for shooting a nature document.

  11. Oh, crap by pipingguy · · Score: 3, Funny

    So is the old Psygnosis game now obsolete and environmentally incorrect?

    1. Re:Oh, crap by DrEldarion · · Score: 1

      Slashdot headline: "Is lemmings dead?"

    2. Re:Oh, crap by Wakkow · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I wanted to post a link to DHTML Lemmings (the original Lemmings in your browser) but it looks like they had to take it down. Help the guy figure out who, exactly, is the owner of Lemmings!

    3. Re:Oh, crap by chgros · · Score: 1

      the original Lemmings in your browser
      Or how to make crawl on a P IV 2GHz a game that was fast on a 386 16MHz...

    4. Re:Oh, crap by FPCat · · Score: 1

      I say we bombard them with e-mail, demanding a patch ASAP!

    5. Re:Oh, crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...or a 7.14 MHz Amiga. There were even versions for the 1 MHz Commodore 64 and the 4 MHz Amstrad CPC series, but those were somewhat cut down.

  12. And you thought Disney was evil before... by The+Wicked+Priest · · Score: 1

    The snopes.com link is really shocking. I notice it dates to '96... I'm surprised I hadn't heard about it until now.

    --
    Share and Enjoy: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  13. aha! by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 4, Funny

    They're not suicidal, they're just tasty!

    --
    "I only speak the truth"
    Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
  14. Not true by CGP314 · · Score: 1, Redundant
    1. Re:Not true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you can link a link in the story!

      Go you!

  15. Wow... by jgrumbles · · Score: 1

    I guess I can sleep now that I know the mystery behind lemming population flucuations.

    1. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speaking of which..doesn't EVERY population fluctuate? In fact, most things fluctuate on every scale.

    2. Re:Wow... by ViolentGreen · · Score: 1

      I wish people would look at timestamps before marking something as redundant.

      --
      Not everything is analogous to cars. Car analogies rarely work.
  16. Someone needs to... by indros13 · · Score: 4, Funny
    ...get a game mod out for the original Lemmings. It just won't be the same...

    --
    Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
    1. Re:Someone needs to... by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 1

      great sig man

      --
      "I only speak the truth"
      Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
  17. I'm sceptical by spektr · · Score: 5, Funny

    This doesn't concur with the results I got from my private investigations regarding the behaviour of lemmings. I did some massive computer simulations during the 90's, which showed that lemmings are stupid animals which will walk into one direction until they fall off the cliff. Only few of them can use jack-hammers or parachutes, and even that not without explicit order.

  18. Re:Suicide theory IS a fraud, Snopes: by PoisonousPhat · · Score: 1
    From the great repository of urban legends that is Snopes.com:

    'Lemmings were induced into jumping off a cliff for this Disney nature film'

    ...surely there's SOMETHING else more worthy of study.

    --
    Losers choose to abuse the use of "loose".
  19. Oh no! by FrostedWheat · · Score: 4, Funny

    *puts hands on head* Oh-no!!!

    *POP*

    1. Re:Oh no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make sure you wipe that up.

    2. Re:Oh no! by Professeur+Shadoko · · Score: 1

      Actually the right body for a post with such a title would be:

      Oh no...
      More Lemmings !

  20. Who cares! by mcbunny29 · · Score: 0, Troll



    I mean really, who gives a rat's arse about the Lemmings population flux??!

    If the Lemmings were running Linux or if the researchers found the solution playing the Lemmings videograme then maybe I'd be midly interested...

  21. Snopes.com weighs in on the Disney story... by jbum · · Score: 1

    ... and provides a few inaccuracies of its own, if the new article is to be believed.

    http://www.snopes.com/disney/films/lemmings.htm

  22. Deja vu all over again by heironymouscoward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Chaos theory was in part defined following studies of populations of just TWO animals, the arctic hare and the the Canadian lynx. This was around 1989.

    So why should it be surprising that populations of lemmings are chaotic?

    What, exactly, is the news here?

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature
    1. Re:Deja vu all over again by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      They aren't chaotic. They're very cyclical, following a four-year pattern, allowing you to predict when the next population rise or drop will be. That's the opposite of chaotic.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    2. Re:Deja vu all over again by pVoid · · Score: 1
      Uh, if you had RTFA, you would see that the cycle isn't chaotic, but is actually precisely 4 years long.

      It's not news really, that cycle has been going on for centuries, probably millenia before it was posted on slashdot... I guess it kind of depends on your definition of news.

      <fight... urge..... to... make... crack-shot comment>

    3. Re:Deja vu all over again by joto · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I have no idea which book you are talking about. Nor why you want to talk about chaos theory, which is clearly inappropriate here (although a trendy word).

      Even my fathers high-school math books had examples of populations of two animals, one predator, and one herbivore. This is about the simplest differential equation you can get, and has probably been well-known for quite a few centuries. If anyone has felt the need to use chaos theory here, they must clearly have worked with completely different examples.

      Furthermore, nobody is surprised that lemming populations are chaotic. The reason is that lemming populations are not chaotic. And we are not surprised about this either, is we've had the chance to observe lemming populations out in the nature for several millennia, and so far, they've been pretty regular in their cycles.

      There is one thing I can agree with you about. Yes, there were no news here. Anyone half-way educated about biology would know better than to believe that lemmings do mass-suicide. Unfortunately, I haven't got access to nature and the original article, but I assume the "breakthrough" if any, would be more akin to a more reliable model, or better insight into why some model already works well. Solving differential equations for populations with 3 or 4 species shouldn't exactly be beyond the abilities of most biologists working with population.

    4. Re:Deja vu all over again by I+Be+Hatin' · · Score: 1
      Chaos theory was in part defined following studies of populations of just TWO animals, the arctic hare and the the Canadian lynx. This was around 1989.

      Chaos theory was well established by 1989. The term "chaos" was coined in 1975 (Li & Yorke), and Lorenz' original paper was in 1963.

      --
      I know god exists. I read it on the internet, so it must be true.
  23. Carrying capacity by Moderation+abuser · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I suspect that the human population will go through a similar cycle. Exponential growth, exceed the carrying capacity and then population crash. We're seeing it at the local scale but with globalisation, I don't see anything to stop it on a global scale.

    At the moment, the western industrialised nations are fairly steady state but the developing and 3rd world nations are definitely not. We can look forward to wars over resources in the relatively near future (have they started already, iraq just the prequel?).

    --
    Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
    1. Re:Carrying capacity by kfg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Even in the "steady state" western nations you can have local overpopulations with dramatic consequences.

      Gang violence, school shootings, "going postal"?

      We pack a lot of large, predatory animals with a complex social structure based on submission/dominance into small spaces with artificial local shortages.

      Can you say, "Too may rats in the cage," boys and girls? I knew you could.

      KFG

    2. Re:Carrying capacity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't plan to be eating by anything, not even a stoat.

    3. Re:Carrying capacity by juuri · · Score: 1

      Birth rates are dropping on an almost global scale. As societies modernize the birth rate falls at a blistering place.

      For example in India:

      Birth Rate per 1k @1970 - 41.2
      Birth Rate per 1k @1995 - 28.3

      Sure improved medicine helps but so does the education and rise of women's rights in societies. We are currently in the end of our world's population explosion for humans.

      --
      --- I do not moderate.
    4. Re:Carrying capacity by Persecuted_Telemarke · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Actually, it depends pretty radically on which type of model you're considering.

      For example, if you assume that the population is governed by a continuous-time model, i.e. by a differential equation, then it is not really possible for a population to exceed a carrying capacity, and then crash. What happens is that the population asymptotically approaches the carrying capacity, but can never go above it. I think it is reasonable to put humans in this case, as our growth rate is a smooth frunction of time (no breeding season, for example).

      Aside note: for those who may not know, the term "carrying capacity" is a term used in population dynamics which sort of represents the available resources. In most models, what happens is that there is some amount of population which can be supported by the existing resources, and if the population is below that, it should grow, and above that, it should shrink. Most "reasonable" models of population dynamics have such a carrying capacity, and I can even state a theorem: if you have any model where the growth rate of a species depends on its size, AND it is true that this growth rate becomes negative for some sufficiently large value of the population, then you will have a carrying capacity. Furthermore, if nothing in the system changes, the population will approach this value and stay there forever.

      Now, I'm not saying a crash is impossible, but you need a more complicated system. There are several ways to add complexity to the system. One way is to consider a predator-prey type of system, but of course humans have nothing which can really be called a predator. The only thing I can think of is some sort of disease, but this leads to a different model altogether (some sort of "epidemological model"), and these models rarely predict population crashes, as they have a different character, which is disease needs to be carried by disease-carrying individuals (ok, duh) but then these tend to die out. So the predator carries its own destruction around with it, in some sense, and it corrects itself.

      Another postulate one can make, and I think this is somewhat reasonable, is that the carrying capacity of the earth might change radically in the future (and of course, radically downward would be the interesting case in this discussion). This could happen any number of ways. And if it turns out that the carrying capacity moves on some very quick timescale (much more rapid than the change in growth of the population), then we could see a "crash". For example, if it turned out that our ability to grow food took a big hit for some reason or another, then this could happen.

      One last way to get population crashes is to consider the case of the discrete system. For example, this does apply to species which have a discrete (say, yearly) breeding system. The population does not change smoothly over time, but is simply a function of one year to the next. It is somewhat surprising, but true, that the dynamics of a population with a discrete model can be much more complicated than those with a continuous model. In fact, a discrete model can actually have what satisfies the mathematical definition of "chaos". Thus you can see any type of behaviour you might imagine, including crashes, but also including periodicity (say, a 17-year cycle for population values). I do not think it is reasonable to assume that humanity can be modeled by this sort of model, even in a coarse-grained sense, because we breed day in and day out all the time. This (and this is somewhat surprising) makes our population a much more stable quantity.

      --

      Persecuted Telemarketers Unite!

    5. Re:Carrying capacity by pVoid · · Score: 1
      We can look forward to wars over resources in the relatively near future

      I think they haven't "already started", they've been going on for at least 30 years since the first Petroleum crisis of the seventies.

      Aside from that though, the earth is humoungous, we will kill each other well before we run out of harvestable food bearing land. Just a number: something 80% of american produce is wasted (in transport or other places).

      The reason ethiopia doesn't have food is not exactly because they don't have land, but rather because they don't have water to irrigate it... ie money.

    6. Re:Carrying capacity by scrytch · · Score: 1

      Even in the "steady state" western nations you can have local overpopulations with dramatic consequences.

      Gang violence, school shootings, "going postal"?


      By that logic, Hong Kong and Tokyo should have the highest violent crime rates in the world...

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
    7. Re:Carrying capacity by hazem · · Score: 1

      This is very interesting, so I only say this a bit tongue-and-cheek...

      If your model does not predict poplution crashes, and there are, in fact, population crashes, you have problem. Your model is not very good.

      You have two choices... change your model, or exterminate the subject of your model and get rid of all the evidence...

    8. Re:Carrying capacity by kfg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Please note that I made no argument as to the "casue" of violent crime. I made an anecdotal reference to a known phenomenon and understand it as such.

      It is a mistake to consider that people are rats, or dogs, or chimpanzees. This does not preclude the idea that studying the behaviour of such cannot reveal to us clues about our own behaviours.

      Nor did I even imply that violence is the only possible response to overcrowding and local shortages. Since it is not there is no reason to imply direct proportionality between crowding and violence, and I did not do so. It is, however, demonstrably one of the expected responses in virtually all of the mammals, especially those that are carnivorous.

      As crowding goes up and shortages occur there is a certain probability of violence increasing, as there is a certain probability of certain other phenomenon as well.

      KFG

    9. Re:Carrying capacity by Persecuted_Telemarke · · Score: 1
      We can look forward to wars over resources in the relatively near future

      I think they haven't "already started", they've been going on for at least 30 years since the first Petroleum crisis of the seventies.

      I'd go even further. I'd say almost all wars in human history were, at least to some degree, a fight over limited resources. At the very least, once colonization became a major factor in, say, 1500 or so, that's all it's been about. The big boys fighting over the resources...

      --

      Persecuted Telemarketers Unite!

    10. Re:Carrying capacity by Persecuted_Telemarke · · Score: 1
      I agree with your first comment completely, and I wouldn't even think it was tongue-in-cheek... If we see a phenomenon in nature, and the model doesn't predict that, then the model is not good. Certainly.

      What makes life complicated is there are tons of models out there, and who knows which one goes with which real system? That's why scientists get paid the "big bucks". Now that is tongue-in-cheek.

      --

      Persecuted Telemarketers Unite!

    11. Re:Carrying capacity by yourmom16 · · Score: 1
      I agree with your first comment completely, and I wouldn't even think it was tongue-in-cheek... If we see a phenomenon in nature, and the model doesn't predict that, then the model is not good. Certainly.

      No it means nature is not good

      --
      "We have got to make Stan understand the importance of voting, because he'll definitely vote for our guy." - South Park
    12. Re:Carrying capacity by plastik55 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is not true that a continuous-time model can not be chaotic. Consider the Lorentz strange attractor which was discovered on an analog computer. The three-body problem in orbital mechanics also behaves chaotically.

      --

      I have a positive modifier on Troll. When I mod someone Troll their karma should go UP!

    13. Re:Carrying capacity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, there are not any global population crashes, which is what this model predicts. This model doesn't apply locally.

    14. Re:Carrying capacity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is not so much that it cannot be chaotic, but that continuous population growth models can't be shown to be chaotic. Discrete models can. Unless, of course, you have a chaotic model of human population growth you'd like to postulate. Didn't think so.

      The author (and I) never said it is impossible that human population growth can be modeled chaotically, just that right now our most effective continuous growth models have nothing to do with chaos theory. Of course, I must concede that the possibility you suggest does exist.

    15. Re:Carrying capacity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the carrying capacity of the earth might change radically in the future

      Humans stockpile food. This artificially raises the carrying capacity for the short-term. If the population rises above the natural carrying capacity for a long enough time, the effective carrying capacity will also drop, forcing the population down.

      I would not be surprised if a differential equation model could be designed that would fit this.

      (Not to mention that the way humans live has a negative impact on the environment, which probably lowers the natural carrying capacity.)

    16. Re:Carrying capacity by annisette · · Score: 1

      Water (drinking) will be a very big issue espically who owns how much of a large river as it goes through several countries. There is an interesting approach to water in the highlands of peru, they have mist nets that catch the morning dew. with some moderen adaption they can actually get enough to drink and store.

      --
      I eat my grapes at room temperature, cuz the cold ones hurt my teeth
    17. Re:Carrying capacity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You got it right, but didn't look far enough.

      All wars are about resources. Sometimes they are sold as being about religion, succession to a throne, or whatever. Many times even the instigators believe those reasons.

      If you do your homework, though, you'll spot the patterns. Yes, even the Crusades were about resources and their distribution.

      Read your histories (many - you need to cancel out the mistakes and point-of-view biases), and especially read Marvin Harris' "Cannibals and Kings". It won't hurt to read his "Cows, Pigs, Wars and Witches" first. That'll get you up to speed on cultural materialism - still the most on-target theory of sociocultural development I've seen.

      What you're seeing as the industrialized countries reaching steady state is actually their approach to the limits of the industrial/post-industrial mode of production and distribution. The bubble is ready to burst!

      Back to school, kiddies!
      Mal the Elder

    18. Re:Carrying capacity by Persecuted_Telemarke · · Score: 2, Informative
      It is not true that a continuous-time model can not be chaotic.

      This is very true. But it is true in the one-dimensional case, which I claim is the case for the dynamics of the population of humans.

      All that being said, why does the model for the population have to be one-dimensional? This is a reasonable objection. An answer to that is, no matter how many dimensions the system has, there should be a way to coarse-grain it and get an essentially 1-D system.

      For example, let the population of humans be P(t). If we make the assumption that the growth rate of humanity depends only upon the number of people alive, then it can be written

      dP/dt = f(P) P,

      where f(P) is some unknown function which absorbs all of the possible variables. For example, we could say that there are thousands of factors which impinge on the growth rate of people, like availability of food, prevalence of pollution, etc. Now, our only assumption is that all of these factors depend on the size of the population. Then we can say that the growth rate is really a function only of P.

      Now, to be fair, it is possible that there are factors which don't depend on the size of the population. But I think it is reasonable, in that all of the standard constraints to growth, like prevalence of pollution, limits of food, etc., can depend only on population.

      Now, if this model is correct, then it is true that this system is not chaotic at all, but that there is complete regularity. For example, as long as it is true that for sufficiently large P, this function f(P) is negative, then there is a number, called the carrying capacity for the system, and any initial population will tend towards it.

      I do agree that it is possible that this function f can depend on some other things, for example imagine that for some strange reason, tomorrow the availability of the food supply takes a big hit, and that f becomes much smaller without P changing. Then we could have a crash of some sort, but my feeling is that although this is possible, it's not reasonable. I think that on the other hand it is reasonable to expect that this function f will depend only on P.

      --

      Persecuted Telemarketers Unite!

  24. Re:Origin of this legend by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

    The idea that Lemmings commit suicide was introduced by Disney

    Actually, it was perpetuated and made into a mass-market notion by Disney, but they didn't think that up by themselves. They just made it worse.

    I guess the credits didn't include the claim "no animals were harmed during the making of this movie"... :-(

    "Dozens of animals were hurled off a cliff during the making of this documentory." more likelly...

    But that disclaimer allways makes me wonder if the filmakers forcibly made the entire earth vegans for the duration of filming, AND prevented all accidental deaths such as roadkill...
    A better phrasing would be "No animals were hurt by the process of making this film" or something.

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  25. Re:Gee. by Jodaxia · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I guess whoever did this study failed their first ecology course in college.

    Almost every ecology teacher beats several key things into your heads.
    1. Survival of the fittest
    in other words an individual does not do something for the benifit of the species, mainly due to the fact that doing so diverts energy that could be used to producing more young so that their genes survive. The individual will do things to benifit their genes, but not for unrelated individuals of the same species. Social species do have some altruistic behaviours, but their communities are generally made up of individuals that are related. However these altruistic behaviors do not include suicide.

    2. The lynx and Hare.
    Classic example of what is going on with the lemmings here. As the hare population increases there is more food for the lynx, thus more offspring are produced. As the lynx population increases there are fewer hare to eat and the lynx population declines, and so on.

    So this study on lemmings is not surprising, actually I'm quite shocked that someone didn't figure it out sooner.

    --
    crowbar??
  26. Long-tailed Skua by Elf-friend · · Score: 1

    For American readers, that's a Long-tailed Jaeger.

  27. Beyond the article... by FollowThisLogic · · Score: 3, Funny

    Apparently it has also been found that when the lemmings do jump off the cliff, they all have little umbrellas to make it down safely.

    1. Re:Beyond the article... by mlk · · Score: 1

      Or some bastard humman grabbing a quick snack...

      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
  28. RTFA? by Persecuted_Telemarke · · Score: 4, Informative
    Ok, fine, I guess most people can't get to the original Science article. I had to do some funky proxy shit with my university's library server. So it should be somewhat forgiven.

    But I just wanted to point out that the ABC article is somewhat misleading. The original research article at no point addresses or attempts to refute the mass-suicide myth. Because, honestly, no scientist believed that was possible. The question they considered was much more reasonable: do the large deviations come from predators eating lemmings, or from a lack of vegatation for the lemmings to eat? It seems as though they have resolved that the crashes in population come from predator over-population, not from food scarcity.

    This article will probably not shake the foundations of population dynamics. As some other posters have pointed out, it is not so surprising that one sees immense highs and massive crashes in a predator-prey system, because these phenomena exist even in simple mathematical models of pred-prey systems. So for a mathematician this should fly right under the radar.

    On the other hand, to a population dynamics guy, this is somewhat interesting, as in that field it is typically considered hard to model these dynamics accurately. It seems as though these guys have determined some parameters in the population dynamics model experimentally, and this is what it is interesting.

    --

    Persecuted Telemarketers Unite!

  29. Re:Origin of this legend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is the moderated as informative?? more like redundant.. the damn snopes.com link is IN THE FUCKING SLASHDOT ARTICLE

  30. Suicider Lemmings And Bomber Blemmings ... by leoaugust · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Now that we are discussing suicide, and how we had a whole messed up definition of what the suicider-lemmings were doing, I wonder if we have a similarly messed up understanding of the suiciders ...

    I know that POTUS has defined it in pretty much black and white, and the LUNATIC calls them the deadenders, the military calls them operatives ... but whatever ... basically the question that pops in my head is whether the operating definition of a suicide-bomber that is currently in vogue is comprehensive or not.

    And the analogy with the lemmings is whether the use of a suicide-bomber as a strategic and assymetric weapon of war is something that may make sense when the analysis is done at the level of survival of not individuals or groups but at the level of cultures ... or at some other level that is atleast higher than that of a boot in the face.

    --
    To see a world in a grain of sand, and then to step back and see the beach where the sand lies ...
    1. Re:Suicider Lemmings And Bomber Blemmings ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no need to "understand" suicide bombing. The nature of suicide bombing makes rationalization irrelevant. Trying to logically dismantle a suicide bomber seems quite pointless. Now, if you want to look at it emotionally, that's another story. Perhaps you've never lost family members or close friends suddenly. But when the people you love have died, it's not uncommon for a person to want to join them in death. This isn't a logical issue, it's emotional and the longer the violence persists, the worse it will become. The only way to stop suicide bombers is for all sides to stop the violence. Now, who is perpetuating the violence? When all of those parties stop their violence, the suicide bombings will eventually stop as well.
      No justice, no peace. The logic is simple. There is no mystery in the logic, nor in the emotions.

    2. Re:Suicider Lemmings And Bomber Blemmings ... by kfg · · Score: 1

      Our own cultural view of suicide is the anomoly and derives, essentially, from Jewish tradition and thus Christian. Even if one does not subscribe to any religion and does not believe in God the social culture that you grew up in, and thus absorbed, is at its heart based on Judeo-Christian ethics and morality.

      Thou shalt not steal.
      Thou shalt not kill.

      Etc.

      If you believe you belong to God than harming yourself, God's property, is a sin. I have a friend who cannot be buried in his family plot because he has tatoos. This is selfmutilation and a sin against God. Imagine if you are outcast by a tatoo what suicide must mean.

      Most cultures do not have such an underlying belief structure and actually "glorify" suicide, or at least hold it as a valid personal choice.

      Chingachgook's selfinflicted death in fire has deep social significance that is difficult to understand unless one abandon's one's own cultural biases and adopts the point of view of the North Eastern Native American.

      Suicide is perfectly understandable, especially that done in the name of cultural selfdefense.

      What do you suppose Thermopylae was?

      Do we not have our own fallen war heros for "God, Honor and Country"?

      KFG

    3. Re:Suicider Lemmings And Bomber Blemmings ... by phoebusQ · · Score: 1
      >> Suicide is perfectly understandable, especially that done in the name of cultural selfdefense. >>

      But killing of innocents isn't perfectly understandable.

    4. Re:Suicider Lemmings And Bomber Blemmings ... by fucksl4shd0t · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      But killing of innocents isn't perfectly understandable.

      Exactly how are the victims innocent? Not once has a terrorist group struck another group of people without believing them to be guilty. How is your sense or morality so superior that it overrides their judgement? In the case of Israel, well, the Israelies are living on land that was previously controlled by the dominant culture in the area. The land was forced clear by Western nations having some sort of guilt complex over Hitler's extermination program. Great. So we take all these Jews that were going to be murdered by Nazis and place them in their traditional home (Israel), simultaneously suurounding them by a culture that would like nothing more than to annihilate them. Can you say, out of the frying pan, into the fire?

      Of course, the population that lives at the expense of this particular situation, and the republic officials elected by this population are guilty as well. Just like the man who pays the assassin is guilty of the murder.

      Whether these people (suicide bombers) are making the right decision is dependent on their own individual world view and morality, usually instilled on them by the culture around them. Whether the dominant world view wants them to live in this world is entirely a different matter. The nice thing about suicide bombers, though, is that they will sooner or later remove themselves from this world and cease to be a threat.

      --
      Like what I said? You might like my music
    5. Re:Suicider Lemmings And Bomber Blemmings ... by no+reason+to+be+here · · Score: 1

      Your response seems to assume that there is no such thing as objective truth, at least with regard to human behavior. To expand your argument a little bit ad nauseum, Hitler earnestly believed that the Jews were inferior and were the cause of Germany's, and thus, the master race's problems. How is our sense of morality so superior that it overrides his judgement? Obviously, there must be something in our morality that does override the judgement of Adolf Hitler. Furthermore, I would argue that this is more than simply a battle between different, competing, cultural memes that will utlimately play itself out in Darwinian fashion. Islamic Fundamentalism (indeed, all fundamentalism) is evil, and ultimately, detrimental to our survival, yet fundamentalism still continues to be attractive to members of our species. It should, by all means, simply die out, as you suggest at the end of your post; however, it seems to persist and, perhaps, even to grow overtime. Looking at the situation logically, one can see that overall western liberal democracy is the superior cultural system (in terms of how it benefits humanity), but it will not necessarily be the one that survives this current conflict.

    6. Re:Suicider Lemmings And Bomber Blemmings ... by fucksl4shd0t · · Score: 1

      Your response seems to assume that there is no such thing as objective truth, at least with regard to human behavior.

      I would take that as an axiom. :)

      How is our sense of morality so superior that it overrides his judgement? Obviously, there must be something in our morality that does override the judgement of Adolf Hitler.

      I don't think there's anything that says it's right for our sense of morality to override his, and the fundamentalists you discuss later in your post. I do think that you are mostly correct, with the exception that there isn't anything inherently right about us opposing them. We have to, it's in our morality system to oppose oppression and those who would bring about suffering. When that oppression grows to a point where it directly or indirectly endangers our own culture, then we must oppose it with any means necessary. It's part of our own morality system. It is also part of theirs, they just define the basic words differently. :) From the point of view of the Islamic fundamentalists, the US is an oppressive empire. From our own point of view, it's a bit different.

      You'll find, Luke, that many of the truths we cling to depend entirely on your point of view.

      Looking at the situation logically, one can see that overall western liberal democracy is the superior cultural system (in terms of how it benefits humanity), but it will not necessarily be the one that survives this current conflict.

      Indeed, Western liberal democracy has brought about a lot of good, positive changes to the world. Longer lifespans as a result of happier lives, better medical research, etc. We can list all the benefits we want, but it's been proven time and again throughout history that when you let the people of a nation make the rules, the nation prospers. The problem is that it's very easy, when there's problems (such as the current fear of terrorism, the war on drugs, etc) to point at the free way of life as the culprit. If there were more police, we'd have less drugs. Right? But if there were more police, we'd also have less freedom. I think that what is needed now is a group of people, super-cops, that adhere to their own system of morality and wisdom, and justice. Jedi. Yeah, that's what we need. :) Seriously!

      --
      Like what I said? You might like my music
    7. Re:Suicider Lemmings And Bomber Blemmings ... by phoebusQ · · Score: 1

      First of all, by your logic you can't fault me for hating such bombers, because I believe them to be guilty. So if that's really your stance, you can just stop now.
      But let us continue. For one, regardless of whether you believe the victims to be innocent or guilty, I think you might agree that summary execution is not in order. What's more, the Right Decision is NOT only based on individual world view. If that were so, then if I think you deserve to be murdered because I disagree with you, that would be A-OK. One general measure of civilization is that it values human life to at least some degree. If you at all value human life, then you would see that regardless of justification, such suicide bombing is wrong.

    8. Re:Suicider Lemmings And Bomber Blemmings ... by fucksl4shd0t · · Score: 1

      First of all, by your logic you can't fault me for hating such bombers, because I believe them to be guilty. So if that's really your stance, you can just stop now.

      NOt at all. I agree with you that what they're doing is wrong. :)

      But let us continue. For one, regardless of whether you believe the victims to be innocent or guilty, I think you might agree that summary execution is not in order. What's more, the Right Decision is NOT only based on individual world view. If that were so, then if I think you deserve to be murdered because I disagree with you, that would be A-OK. One general measure of civilization is that it values human life to at least some degree. If you at all value human life, then you would see that regardless of justification, such suicide bombing is wrong.

      My only point is that from their point of view, the bombers are doing what is right. I don't consider summary execution to be acceptable, and philosophically oppose the death penalty. However, I also think that murderers and the like are frequently not capable of living in society as we have it today, and that they should be removed from society. I'm open to alternatives that don't involve execution.

      As far as the suicide bombers themselves go, as I said, from their point of view what they're doing is right. I don't fault them for that. Quite the opposite, I think that someone giving their life doing what they think is right is a gift that should be respected, even if you don't agree with them. I also think that as far as the actual issue goes, the issue of Israeli and American Imperialism in the area, the bombers are on the right side of the issue and we are, in fact, on the wrong side. Finally, I think that their methods are totally uncalled for. Islam is a peaceful religion. Judaism, however, is not. Christianity is supposed to be. But Islam, as it is practiced widespread anyway, is a peaceful religion. From where I'm standing, suicide bombing for religious reasons from Moslems is hypocrisy. I think that the means with which these particular people are acting on their, uh, for lack of a better word, righteousness is totally wrong, but that it doesn't invalidate their point of view. Condemn the action, not the child. :)

      The issue, as far as the US is concerned, is even more complicated, however. We can't pull our support of Israel in a fashion that even remotely indicates that the terrorists "won". We can't do anything that would make anyone think that they will get their way by throwing such tantrums, or else they'll just keep deciding they want shit from us and keep up the terrorism. Quite the contrary, we have to respond in a fashion that will motivate them to think more seriously before engaging in a terrorist attack against us. The Israelis are in a similar position. They can't just pack up and leave in response to the terrorist attacks. They can leave for any other reason but that. If they leave for that reason, then Jews the world over will likely become a target of hate once again, since they'll be viewed as pushovers. While both Israel and the US have a sordid history in that region of the world, and neither one of us has been exactly nice to that part of the world, we're in this hole now and it's not easy to get out of it without laying down a foundation for further actions against us. It's a complicated reason. As much as I'd like for our country to just quit screwing around over there like we have been, it's not nearly so cut and dried as all that.

      --
      Like what I said? You might like my music
  31. What a stoater by RabidStoat · · Score: 1
    What with this .. 'Lemming populations, they say, surge spectacularly and fall just as quickly, thanks to the combined feasting of four predators: the stoat, arctic fox, snowy owl and a seabird called the long-tailed skua.

    and this .. This page was generated by a Group of Trained Rabbits for RabidStoat (689404) it's been quite a day !

  32. Natural Selection? by shirai · · Score: 1
    This Article suggests that the population flux may be strongly linked to the evolution of the species through natural selection. Here is the relevant quote:

    Although several species of small rodents that live in temperate climates also reach peaks of abundance about every four years and some of them reach much higher densities at the peak than lemmings do, none can equal the extreme scarcity of lemmings at the nadir. Such extreme scarcity raises the spectre of extinction. But passing through a population "bottleneck" probably strongly favours the individuals best adapted to survival in harsh arctic conditions. Doing it once every four years or so may be a device to keep selection abreast of the changes continually going on in the Arctic.
    --
    Sunny

    Be my Friend

  33. The last installment was a by bstadil · · Score: 1

    real cliff hanger......

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
    1. Re:The last installment was a by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fuck you and your lame attempt at humour

  34. Re:University of Finland? by AvantLegion · · Score: 2, Informative
    A little Googling reveals that the professor listed in the article is of the University of Helsinki, which, once upon a time, was the Imperial Alexander University of Finland (so changed to U of Helsinki a couple of years after Finland gained independence).

  35. Re:Just to remind you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's so unpatriotic, I'm gonna call Ashcroft.

  36. Re:Origin of this legend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    +4 for linking a link in the article.

    Ahh dont ye just love /.

  37. Lets go! by hkg4r7h · · Score: 1

    Oh no..

    *sounds of lemmings exploding*

    --
    -- duh
  38. Lemming Recipe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Take 5 lemmings, alive or dead (if alive bite their heads off with your mouth, then clean them)

    put olive oil or butter in a skiller

    use 1 bell pepper
    use 2 onions

    sautee on high for 15 minutes or until meat turns
    blue

    you can also pre season with lea and perrins

    makes a great meal!

  39. Re:Just to remind you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You better call Saddam Hussein you unpatriotic pinko!

  40. Re:Anyone else think this was about computer Lemmi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What an insightful thought. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the matter. +5 funny.

  41. Re:Suicide theory IS a fraud, Snopes: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can link a link in the story!

    FUCKING HELL, you are cool!

    I love you...

  42. Caribou and animal suicides by vishakh · · Score: 1

    I wonder why it took them so long to come up with a model for lemmings' weird population behavior. I think such "boom and bust" cycles have also been observed for caribou and the arctic wolf. A rise in the caribou population causes a corresponding rise for wolves and both fall dramatically afterwards. I'm not completely sure about this, so please feel free to correct me here.

    Also, it is interesting that suicidal behavior among animals does exist. This Everything2 node provides some very interesting information about this matter.

    --

    Posting messages for the betterment of humanity..

  43. Listen to this radio show! It covers lemmings! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  44. This is new information? by azaris · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Apart from the "University of Finland" and all the cutesy Lemmings jokes, does this strike anyone as horrificly unscientific? I mean, it's been observed for ages that the growth of the population of the prey causes a growth in population of the predator. Then your population growth for the lemmings looks something like:

    dL/dt = bL/2 - hP

    where L is the lemming population, b is the average number of lemmings born in a time interval, P is the number of predators and h is some constant. P on the other hand is related to L by some observed relation:

    dP/dt ~ L

    Given suitable values for b and h we can predict the behaviour of the lemming population without having to invent catastrophic events to explain the fluctuations of L without any empirical evidence to support them.

    1. Re:This is new information? by HidingMyName · · Score: 1
      This model is a a nice start, but would benefit from a few refinements. I'm not sure I have time to work out the math here and now, so I'll leave that as an exercise for the student :-). Some specific suggestions include:
      1. Consider adding carrying capacity, which is quite critical in arctic populations, since there is substantially less biomass and hence food in arctic environments (due to reduced solar energy).
      2. Additionally, your equation appears to assume that the sex ratio (male to female) is 1:1, but I'm not sure that is true (it may be but might not be). Finally, the rate of predation should depend on the ability of predators to encounter prey, and your predation rate term is independent of the number of lemmings in the environment.
      3. Finally, homogeneous mixing models are not good for large populations with spatial diversity. In particular, when population is sparse, variability in the population begins to dominate, while for large populations mean behavior dominates.
    2. Re:This is new information? by vidarh · · Score: 1
      It is new information because it was not previously known exactly how the predator populations and the lemming populations interacted. In this case it's not nearly as simple as you describe.

      One of the problems was that not all of the predators involved in the cycle have lemmings as their primary food - only the stoat do. The other predators that eat lemmings only resort to lemmings when they are so plentiful that hunting them is too easy to miss out on.

      Another issue was that the lemming cycle is extremely static. Most other predator prey cycles are relatively chaotic, but the lemming population usually cycles in four years.

      This is a result of the particular predators involved. The stoats population number follow the lemmings, but approximately a year delayed, because it depends entirely on the lemmings for survival, whereas the other predators aren't particularly affected because they have other food sources. Once the lemming population start exploding it manages to get really big because the stoat doesn't catch up until a year after, then it drops dramatically because of the stoat, and is kept low until the stoat population have dropped down at which point it explodes again.

      In contrast, in many other predator-prey cycles the cycle is controlled externally based on the prey's access to food, which tend to depend on weather patterns and temperature levels which affect the amount of specific plants that grow, but the lemmings food sources are almost always plentiful and hence you get a pattern that is controlled by breeding cycles of the predator instead.

    3. Re:This is new information? by You're+All+Wrong · · Score: 1

      For "University of Finland", read "University of Helskini, Finland" (of Linus fame).

      For "ABC News Online", read "ABC poorly-researched partial truths online".

      YAW.

      --
      Your head of state is a corrupt weasel, I hope you're happy.
  45. Re:Anyone else think this was about computer Lemmi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nope..but then I realize there's actually a real world out there.

  46. The real killer of lemmings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.you-are-a-huge-nerd.com/public/freepix/ wallpaper2.jpg

  47. a new study needs to be done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This new study needs to be focused on the slashdot lemming and how the groupthink slashbots started and evolved.

  48. Re:Origin of this legend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yup. We all just love and hate it. It's truly a love hate relationship for me.

  49. Parallels closer to home by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Back in the day, THE thing to study at university was Chemical Engineering, since graduates were in high demand and earned a fortune.

    Guess what ? 3 years later, there was a glut and they couldn't find jobs.

    Parallels with today's job market anyone ?

    Parallels with lemming population ?

    1. Re:Parallels closer to home by michaelhood · · Score: 0

      Maybe they'll mass suicide, too.

  50. Re:Origin of this legend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Dude, that's the best troll I've ever seen. I mean how did you pull it off? did the Oracle tell you "if you post the exact same link as the story at precisely 1:53PM, you have a chance of succeeding".

    I'm truly impressed.

  51. Re:Origin of this legend by timeOday · · Score: 1
    I guess the credits didn't include the claim "no animals were harmed during the making of this movie"... :-(
    But that disclaimer allways makes me wonder if the filmakers forcibly made the entire earth vegans for the duration of filming, AND prevented all accidental deaths such as roadkill...
    I agree with your point. In fact preventing harm to animals is much harder than that, since almost all animals are harmed by... other hungry animals. That and starvation (life at carrying capacity ain't easy).
  52. Pingus by yerricde · · Score: 2, Funny

    If the Lemmings were running Linux

    Then they'd be Pingus

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  53. Re:Anyone else think this was about computer Lemmi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bet you're the laugh at parties.

  54. Re:University of Finland? by Strandman · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure there's no such thing as the "University of Finland". At least, I've been living in Finland for the past two years and I've never heard of it.

    If you read the post once more you may notice that little detail that states:
    Universities of Finland. And I'm sure that Finland have several universities.

  55. The game! by cuban321 · · Score: 0

    Man I wish I could find that game for download, hell even for purchase. Hours of entertainment.

  56. MOD OTHERS DOWN! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Now, that was actually funny, but was preceeded by a dozen other, lesser, Lemmings jokes which took the wind out of it somewhat.

    Could someone mod the other Lemmings jokes down to -1, so the first one everyone sees is this one?

    Ta,

  57. Re:University of Finland? by Ami+Ganguli · · Score: 1

    Hmm. Implying that all the universities in Finland participated? That seems pretty unlikely.

    In fact Finland does have many universities. A great many when you consider it only has about 5 million people.

    --
    It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
  58. Survival Strategies by Detritus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A popular survival strategy for many insects is to synchronize their breeding so that they produce a huge number of offspring within a short period of time. The predators can stuff themselves silly but there are plenty of survivors.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    1. Re:Survival Strategies by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      A popular survival strategy for many insects is to synchronize their breeding so that they produce a huge number of offspring within a short period of time. The predators can stuff themselves silly but there are plenty of survivors.

      But the flip-side is that it attracts much more attention. Many preditors are sensitive to activity of other animals. If you crank out your babies in isolation, you are far less likely to be noticed. Better yet, walk around and drop just a few at a time. It would look like you were just crapping or something.

      Brother-like response: "But sometimes the crap grows up also, just like you did."

  59. Re:Anyone else think this was about computer Lemmi by KD5YPT · · Score: 1

    Actually, that was the first thought that came to my mind.
    "I thought Lemming blew themselves up in the game... wait, why is the Science journal publishing this crap?... Oh, they're talking about the real Lemmings."

    --
    In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
  60. Re:Gee. by WalksOnDirt · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes, but the details of the altruism seem to be missed in a lot of popular science writing. Evolution is working on behavior here, and the more complicated a behavior is the harder it is to appear and persist. So, if a simple response of helping a neighbor at only a minor cost usually benefits a relative, the fact that nearby non-relatives sometimes get helped isn't violating some evolutionary principle.

    --
    a,e,i,o,u and sometimes w and y (at be if of up cwm by)
  61. Re:Origin of this legend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...not to mention all of the EMOTIONAL TRAUMA

  62. Re:Origin of this legend by Psychic+Burrito · · Score: 1
    I'm truly impressed.

    Thanks, me to :-)

  63. Addendum by kfg · · Score: 1

    I might also point out that crime and violence are seperate issues. One is a behaviour and the other is a violation of a code of behaviour.

    Boxing is not a crime. Boxing is violent.

    Violence can increase as violent crime decreases. There is no logical connection between crime and violence, only a social connection based on local mores.

    KFG

  64. Busy little lemmings by Subcarrier · · Score: 1

    In fact Finland does have many universities. A great many when you consider it only has about 5 million people.

    Yes, Finland is practically swarming with academics.

    --
    "I have opinions of my own, strong opinions, but I don't always agree with them." -- George H. W. Bush
  65. Re:University of Finland? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Professor Ilkka Hanski is from the Department of Ecology and Systematics of University of Helsinki.

  66. What does this have to do w the price of j beans? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What does a story about lemmings have to do with Linux and OSS?????

    We need more topics on why companies should release their products into the public domain, and err, um, nevermind...the subjects are related.

    Companies fail because there are more predators feeding on them...not the lemming mantality that leads them to jump off cliffs.

  67. My favorite was Killime by NoNine · · Score: 1, Funny

    In case you missed the Disney version, Killime was the youngest and the bravest of the lemmings. He was soooo cute! He tried to stop the other lemmings from going over the cliff, but slipped and fell to his death screaming "D'oh!".

  68. "Computer Lemmings"? You mean Windows users? by Prof.+Pi · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Time for another upgrade/mass-migration!"

  69. Univ. of Finland.. sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sigh again: the comment on the original post says: unversities of Finland and Freiburg, as in two universities, not as in "all the universities of Finland and that one from Freiburg, Germany". Also in the original abc post it's "university of Finland". It should read: Ilkka Hanski, University of Helsinki, Finland..

  70. Reported since at least the Eighties by Prof.+Pi · · Score: 1
    I notice it dates to '96... I'm surprised I hadn't heard about it until now.

    Note the references on the Snopes page, which are years earlier.

    I first heard about it in a Boston Globe article in 1987. Boston Globe

  71. Re:"Computer Lemmings"? You mean Windows users? by BigDish · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    No, actually I meant Apple users. As bad as Windows users are, Mac users are 100 times worse about immediately running out and buying the latest upgrade. Jobs is god!.

  72. DISNEY ruined my childhood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With all their lies. LIES I tell you. I can't stand it anymore!!!!111!

  73. "University of Finland" by CptPicard · · Score: 1

    I am always amused when foreigners imagine that in small foreign countries there is just one big kick-ass organization of each kind and then this is called the X of Novistrana... it's almost as if it came straight from South Park. We have a bunch of universities in this country, but none of them are called the University of Finland...

    --
    I want to play Free Market with a drowning Libertarian.
  74. You're right. by GQuon · · Score: 1

    You're right.

    From Science (My university subscribes):

    Olivier Gilg,1,2* Ilkka Hanski,1 Benoit Sittler3

    1 Department of Ecology and Systematics, Division of Population Biology, Post Office Box 65, 00014 University of Helsinki, Finland.
    2 CBGP, Campus de Baillarguet, Equipe Biologie et Gestion des Pullulations (INRA-IRD), CS 30016, 34988 Montferrier/Lez Cedex, France.
    3 Institut fur Landespflege, University of Freiburg, 79085 Freiburg, Germany.

    * To whom correspondence should be addressed

    --
    Irene KHAAAAAAN!
  75. Dodos by Tribbin · · Score: 1

    Is this offtopic?

    http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/expeditions/trea su re_fossil/Treasures/Dodo/dodo.html

    --
    If you mod this up, your slashdot background will turn into a beautiful sunset!
    1. Re:Dodos by Craig3010 · · Score: 1

      When the page can't be found....YESSS!!!

  76. Re:University of Finland? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ilkka Hanski is from the University of Helsinki, nothing relevant seems to come up for Oliver Gilg, so he might be beginning a grad student there.

  77. Wrong concept by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1
    Human beings are rational animals. We tend to do things that are best for us individually. In well-off countries there is no particular economic advantage to having children, so many people don't. This is the restraining factor that is likely to end human population growth by about 2050, and keep population from growing more for the forseeable future.

    Poor countries whose population attempts to grow without bounds will either self-destruct, export their people, or attack their neighbors. Self destruction solves the local problem, although the suffering involved is horrid. Emigration to a richer country will convert their progeny to the no-growth standard. Attacking a stronger country results in defeat of the weaker with consequent loss of life and possible conversion of the poor country to more rational behavior.

    In short, world-wide dramatic human population cycles are unlikely.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  78. I'm afraid you're mistaken by GQuon · · Score: 2, Informative

    Universities of Finland. And I'm sure that Finland have several universities.
    I'm afraid you misread that. The post says "Universities of Finland and Freiburg (Germany)", while the ABC article says "University of Finland, and Benoit Sittler of the University of Freiburg in Germany."
    The university in question is the University of Helsinki, Finland. (I have university access to the Science articles.)

    --
    Irene KHAAAAAAN!
  79. Subscriber! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Olivier Gilg,1,2*

    He's a subscriber!

  80. lemmings by POds · · Score: 1

    What? Now the game doenst make sense! I'll never play it again!

    --


    Giving IE users a taste of their own medicine since 2005 - http://pods.-is-a-geek.net/
  81. FINALLY!!!!! by blah1019 · · Score: 0

    I can sleep at night! This has caused an awful drain on myself and my family, thank God the nightmare is over!

  82. Lemmings are Terrorists by Laconian · · Score: 2, Funny

    especially those suicide bomber ones!

    (double clicks the mushroom cloud)
    OH NO! ...pop!

  83. Where are those tree huggers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Man where are those PETA, Celebs and Green Peace tree huggers when you need 'em? Disney is uhm harming and killing those lemmings!!!

    Oh wait, they are not endangers and they are not as cute as them wheals. Never mind... Disney needs to import at least few thousands of those lemmings for some good mass death effect!

  84. What about weasels? by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

    Don't weasels kill lemmings too? Don't tell me the game lied to me!

    --
    Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
  85. Re:Anyone else think this was about computer Lemmi by GrassyNoel · · Score: 1

    I do love the department title!

    --
    Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
  86. Lemmings Game? by phobonetik · · Score: 1

    Does this mean there'll be a new release of that wonderful (DOS? Amiga?) game, Lemmings? I certainly hope so :) So this time it'll be in Flash (rather than [S/]VGA?)

  87. This is a new problem?!?!? by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

    With all due respect, the problem of predator/prey relationships was solved with differential equations decades ago.

    They demonstrated the idea of equilibrium was not the norm and that, even if it was magically set, fluctuations would rapidly develop.

    As the predator population grows, it begins to kill off too much of the prey. As the prey population dwindles, the predators start starving. Eventually a significant proportion starve off. Then the prey population, freed, bounds back. The predators then start to grow again, this never-ending double sign wave of population vs. time, one's population following the other.

    --
    "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
  88. Not obsolete, just different by jmichaelg · · Score: 1

    The lemmings morphed into Roadies

  89. Way before 1989 by carcosa30 · · Score: 1

    Lotke-Volterra equations were the equation systems used to describe the population dynamics of elk and wolves on Isle Royal. The poster who said this stuff first surfaced in 1989 is almost 100 years off; as I remember, the original study was done by the Hudson Bay company.A LONG year ago.

    --
    Intolerance for ambiguity is the mark of the authoritarian personality.