I mean, that's a weak evolutionary argument against all forms of predation/prey. It assumes a level of cultural/shared knowledge that doesn't typically exist. Also, size =\= intelligence/problem solving. Chimps and humans are both smarter than gorillas.
Yes, troop 1 of monkeys have learned about the monkey-eating plants that have evolved overnight, but troops 2-10 haven't. Eventually troop 1 leaves the deadly forest, and troop 2 comes in. After a few seasons, they notice these fucking plants keep eating their babies (again, most predators go after babies for the reason you mentioned, they haven't learned how to avoid death yet) and then they move on. Repeat for several centuries. Behold nature in all its splendor.
I like the article's ideas: If you can grow large enough to eat a person, you're getting enough nutrition that you don't need to eat a person.
Yes, troop 1 of monkeys have learned about the monkey-eating plants that have evolved overnight, but troops 2-10 haven't. Eventually troop 1 leaves the deadly forest, and troop 2 comes in. After a few seasons, they notice these fucking plants keep eating their babies (again, most predators go after babies for the reason you mentioned, they haven't learned how to avoid death yet) and then they move on. Repeat for several centuries. Behold nature in all its splendor.
I like the article's ideas: If you can grow large enough to eat a person, you're getting enough nutrition that you don't need to eat a person.