วีดีโอ

It really isn't. The term alpha was supposed to refer to a wolf that becomes a leader through dominance and aggression. Basically fighting their way to the top and beating other's into submission. What he's saying is that Instead of a leader being an alpha it's just the oldest wolf. So Instead of an alpha commanding his pack it's just the older wolf guiding them for food and safety. Obviously they're both leaders but the kind of leadership is different.

Are you a groomer ?

Nope just parents

And what are the other rest? Mind giving more information about it?

@@DJEkilibrium The word here used as "most" of the leaders of wolf packs means that some Wolves may still try to establish dominance or use violence in the attempt to establish themselves as Alpha.

@@voiceofmanywaters3720 Thats what I am asking, give me your Factual evidence about which species of Wolfs are the ones that do this

@@DJEkilibrium If you listen to what he said ~he said "most" which is definitely indicative that not "all" wolves react this way and that he is not referencing to wolves in their totality. Listen again it is obvious and he did not say "most" by accident he is referring to a breaking of the general thesis in which he presents in certain individual wolves.

@@voiceofmanywaters3720 Are you even comprehending?, I am asking evidence about the ones that act this way, which are the ones that are LEFT from the Most he says. The ones that fight for power.

The same thing happened to Darwin!

​@@Zach-sg5uureally?? What did he say?

No. Pet dogs and humans would be classified as artificial packs, so they follow the rules of the hierarchy and establish dominance.

He’s literally not disproven anything, he even mentions unrelated wolves forming pecking order, that actually proves his study relevant to domestic dog behavior, and shows his first findings were true about dominance and alpha, it is a thing guys!! This debunk is a hoax!! Don’t listen to it!

Debunk it then, debunk his claims and support it with facts, data and research based on the wolf´s behavior and doing

Your credentials and research notes, please.

I choose to believe this is satire

Parental figures

Those "random adult individuals who don't know each other" stirring up trouble will be chased away by the pack.

@@Journeyagain0 They don't have a choice in captivity. You should look into David' Mech's old research about that to understand it better. In the wild, sure, wolves chase off rivals or kill them, but that's not where his research took place.

​ @Foxy-Lu - Humans are not in captivity, and these so-called "Alpha Males" and "Alpha Females" love to only talk about the 1 or 2 arenas that are their strengths, example "leadership role" as being a middle manager. When people attempt to prop up so-called "Alpha Males" and "Alpha Females" they do the very same thing, refer to the 1-2 arenas they witness these people publicly operate in. Prime example, people referring to say, Lebron James, and can only speak of his on the court basketball abilities. But as we see, take the basketball away from him, he has a bad habit of making an azz out of himself, and only his wife and his children really knows the Lebron James when he's not in a basketball uniform. The only group of humans who have some sort of pecking order is women, not men. The reason is a woman's survivability is dependent on her support system, and for form and maintain that support system requires agreeability and order to keep harmony amongst the group. When it comes to men, one of the hardest things to do is keep men in some type of cohesiveness to accomplish a job, task, or mission, because men tend to desire operating solo. Just because it appears one way out in public, does not mean there isn't a lot of sh*t that takes place behind the scenes. Look no further than the Chicago Bulls' documentary, "The Last Dance". One scene in particular, Coach Phil Jackson had to tell Scotty Pippen to apologize to Dennis Rodman for stuff that happened to Scotty when Dennis played for the Pistons, then he had to tell Dennis to take his hat off inside of a building and have him sit up straight when someone of authority was taking to him.

@@thespadestable Keep it simple. Animals and humans have different levels of will and awareness. Animal lives depend on good genetics, and their ability to find and hold down territory and resources. When two wolves fight for resources, the strongest one wins and will continue to do so unless he is beaten by another wolf. There is no "well behind closed doors, that wolf actually loses fights, but in front of humans, he always wins." Human beings and our society are so much more complex. I see no reason to compare the two, we are vastly different beings.

@@SGKeiana - My comment was not about the wolves, my comment was about how narrow-minded it is for people to try and compare the behavior of not only wolves, but other animals, but cause of the differences in interpersonal relationships. It's usually women and weak azz men who do that to boost their fragile persona. Hence we have the "Alpha Male"/"Beta Male" circle jerking.

He literally explains why. "Alpha wolf" comes from an old outdated concept that wolves fought for dominance which is not the case in the wild. What we call "Alpha wolves" are simply the the parents of the wolf family. Calling them "alphas" not only provides zero additional information, it is also a misuse of the term and misrepresents the true nature of wolf pack structures.

@@taoliu3949 So if "Alpha wolves" are simply the parents of the wolf family, why can't we call the parents of the wolf family "Alpha wolves"? When the term "Alpha Particle" was coined there were a lot of things we didn't understand about quarks (and I believe there still are). Do we need to rename the Alpha Particles just because we learned something new? Do you believe we understand everything about wolves now?

@@matseriksson8177 Do you call human parents "alphas"? What about doe mothers? If not then why are you using the term for wolves? It offers zero context/additional information than simply calling them the "parents" or father/mother. "Alpha wolves" comes from an outdated belief about wolves that's been thoroughly debunked. By saying "alpha" you imply that the wolf attained its position of dominance through fighting, which is not how wolves function in the wild. The term is used in very specific ways in biology. It's a descriptor, not a proper noun.

Not true. Even as wolves age out, they still maintain their breeding status within the pack. You don't call your parents "alphas", or a Doe an "alpha", so why would you use that term for wolves?

That belief has completely been debunked for decades. Wolves in the wild do not fight for dominance. That is only something you see with unrelated wolves in captivity. Wolves in the wild simply split from the pack to start their own packs. The packs are effectively a family.

ALL wolves are capable of breeding. You don't call human parents or does "alphas", so why would you with wolves?

@@taoliu3949You aren't understand my point it seems., Alpha doesn't mean they can only breed, it means that Women will want to breed with them, because they are the top male. Yes, All Human males are "Capable," but there is something called "Natural Selection," and women tend to find the best possible mate in order to have children. Some call this "Hypergamy" as well. These days, with the new and forced concept of "Monogamy," we "Partner up," but in past civilization the top men had many wives and concubines. Look at any Emperor. I was watching a video relating to diet of different civilizations and they mentioned that 6/10 men did not pass on their genes in sub-Sahara Africa, to which I assumed that was actually living males, not including those who died at birth, or in war, to which the number would be much higher. This is also why you hear of the ""8/10" rule, where Women only want the top small % of men, and most men are invisible. So basically, any civilization will want the best possible genetics to pass on in order to benefit the village, tribe, etc. Let alone all of the Animals that do this all the time. Look up what "Puffer Fish" do in order to attract a mate. Male birds are very colorful in order to attract females (Peacocks, Red Cardinals/Robins, etc).

​@@lukebrindax7465 - The terms "Alpha" and "Beta" can't be used with humans, due to our complex interpersonal relationship dynamics. Also, when the idiots talk that crap, they are only referring to a person in one arena, and that's the areas people on the outside sees. The people within their inner circles like, wives, children, and other inner circle friends and family, they see that person in their strong arenas. No different than when people refer to Michael Jordan, for example, as an "Alpha Male", they are only referring to what they see/saw when he was out on the basketball court. It's his wife (first and second), his children, his family members, and his select friends, they bearded witness to all the other areas of Michael that are far from being "Alpha" like. You hear and see it for yourself with these self-proclaimed "Alpha Males" and "Alpha Females". They are quick to talk about their leadership qualities at work, but they are puss*es and or total f*ckups at home or in other arenas, or they have to sell to themselves that since they hold such-and-such position at work, then they should be capable to take those work skills and apply it in their home or in their relationship life....And are perpetual crash and burn victims.

No, there isn't. A wolf pack is simply the parents and their children. What you describe is only seen when unrelated wolves are forced to live together in captivity which is where the concept of "alpha wolf" comes from.

@Black Light - Just like a family with a mother, father, and siblings, there is going to be squabbles between the siblings, but it's the parent's job to quell of that and make it very clear the pecking order between from oldest to youngest. And since there are no child psychologist introducing bullsh*t into the family dynamics, the parents know and reinforces the pecking order goes from the oldest to the youngest.

That is not how darwinism works. The "fittest" in actuality refers to those most likely to survive to reproduce. They are not necessarily the strongest. And even if that's the case, you don't call human parents "alphas", or breeding does "alphas", so why would you with wolves?

No, but there are high chances that the progeny of the strongest and fittest will be of superior quality. Natural selection is a slow and steady process and is affected by environmental factors. Using this analogy with humans is inaccurate.

Yes, that is still the case, as he has pointed out in the video. "Alphas" are only appropriate when referring to the breeding pair in a captive pack consisting of unrelated wolves, or in larger packs with multiple breeding pairs. But these are the exception, not the norm. Therefore it's better to just refer to the "alphas" as simply the parents.

Because that's where the term comes from. The term was formulated when it was believed wolves fought for dominance within a pack, which is not at all the case in the wild. The term offers zero additional information when describing wolves. You don't describe human parents or does as "alphas", so why would you do the same with wolves? It's simply better to just refer to them as the breeding pair or parents of the pack.

@@taoliu3949 The term is not derived exclusively from aggression though. It is merely a phrase to distinguish the top of the hierarchy and there is nothing to suggest that a hierarchy requires aggression or violence to manifest. There's also the fact that the only reason thoughts have changed on it is because research leading to the original conclusion was only carried out in a captive environment with unrealted wolves and other studies have been done with unrealted dogs and those examples do still play out the way those studies suggest. The difference with wild wolf packs is that they tend to be family units headed by a paired male and female who both act as equal alphas in that pack hierarchy. None of this really changes anything about the hierarchies other than the details of how they come to be in the wild.

@@SweatyBaps The "top of the heirarchy" DOES come from the fact that they are the parents of their offsprings. Wolf packs in the wild ARE family units consisting of the parents and their offsprings. There are variations, but by and large this is the case. Unrelated wolves in the wild do not come together to form packs. What happens is single wolves will "hook up" and sire offsprings to form a pack. This is no different than you moving out your parents house, get married, and having kids. Yet you don't refer to human parents as "alphas". The social hierarchy of captive packs of unrelated wolves are by definition, unnatural. It's like calling the mother of a family "head bitch" because that's what they call the dominant female in prison.

@@taoliu3949 Yes, that's what I said in my comment. The reason I brought captive populations is because the oid way of thinking about pack hierarchies comes from research from said captive populations. The thing is the fact that wild populations differ in their hierarchies doesn't change how the captive ones with unrealted animals forced together interact and form their hierarchies. Meaning that both ways of explaining hierarchies in wolves are correct from different perspectives, and the older way is also witnessed in stray and domesticated dogs so it shouldn't just be thrown out because wild wolf populations differ. I get what you're saying about it being unnatural, but the point is that the animals figure out these hierarchies themselves with some kind of innate understanding that they have along with an ability to communicate with each other. Yes, we don't refer to our parents as alphas because we don't need to infer what is going on through observation because we can communicate with each other. That in and of itself doesn't make it incorrct to say that parents are the alphas in a family unit, but human social dynamics are also a hell of a lot more complicated than that of wolves so it isn't really a one to one example anyway. I'm also going to point out that none of what you have said explains or displays a neccesity towards aggression for alphas to exist in a hierarchy so my initial comment still stands. Telling me things I've already said in more simplistic terms doesn't take away from anything I've said either.

@@SweatyBaps So then what does all this have to do with wolves in the wild? Dr. Mech himself has said using the term "Alpha" would only be appropriate when describing wolves in captivity. So now it's correct to call parents alphas? I thought you just said that the term would be proper for wolves in captivity and not in the wild. Do you compete with your parents for dominance in the family? And the term IS derived from wolves maintaining dominance in captivity. That is the whole origin of the term. David Mech: “This is the study that gave rise to the now outmoded notion of alpha wolves. That concept was based on the old idea that wolves fight within a pack to gain dominance and that the winner is the ‘alpha’ wolf.” This is literally the guy who came up with the term "Alpha Wolf" and now he's saying it's wrong.