# Top five deadliest scorpions?



## Jeremy7 (Feb 24, 2012)

Does anyone know for sure, what the top five deadliest scorpions are?


----------



## Comatose (Feb 24, 2012)

I believe the Scorpion King - Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson is number one, but I could be wrong.

Reactions: Like 5 | Funny 1


----------



## Protectyaaaneck (Feb 24, 2012)

Comatose said:


> I believe the Scorpion King - Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson is number one, but I could be wrong.


No, you're right.  I ran a search and that's what I came up with.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## BigJ999 (Feb 24, 2012)

1. Hottentotta tamulus-(Indian red scorpion) venom- iberiotoxin among other's it too kill's many children in its range 
2. A.Australis-(Yellow Fattail scorpion) venom-AaH I among other neurotoxins in its venom it kill's frequently in its range due to being in close proximity to people
3.Tityus serrulatus/Tityus Stigmurus( Brazilian Yellow Scorpion/Brazilian striped back scorpion) venom-Both have a very potent neurotoxin called Tityustoxin it is frequently lethal to children and given its parthenogenetic nature it is common. Other toxins Tst1 for T.stigmurus both have Tityustoxin
4.Hemiscorpius Lepturus-This species has a rather powerful cytotoxic venom and kills many as well its venom causes Puff Adder venom like tissue and muscle damage.


----------



## catfishrod69 (Feb 24, 2012)

Did you forget L. quinquestriatus?





BigJ999 said:


> 1. Hottentotta tamulus-(Indian red scorpion) venom- iberiotoxin among other's it too kill's many children in its range
> 2. A.Australis-(Yellow Fattail scorpion) venom-AaH I among other neurotoxins in its venom it kill's frequently in its range due to being in close proximity to people
> 3.Tityus serrulatus/Tityus Stigmurus( Brazilian Yellow Scorpion/Brazilian striped back scorpion) venom-Both have a very potent neurotoxin called Tityustoxin it is frequently lethal to children and given its parthenogenetic nature it is common. Other toxins Tst1 for T.stigmurus both have Tityustoxin
> 4.Hemiscorpius Lepturus-This species has a rather powerful cytotoxic venom and kills many as well its venom causes Puff Adder venom like tissue and muscle damage.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## BigJ999 (Feb 24, 2012)

Not exactly if we are going to go deadliest I go with the one that kill's the most people it doesn't have to be the most venomous. LQ has very highly potent venom but it kill's fewer people then the one's mentioned. Plus it lives in remote area's away from people it would be like saying the Inland Taipan is the most venomous snake its subjective to me as you have Saw-scaled viper's,Puff adder's and certain species of cobra kill more then a Inland Taipan. A Eastern Brown snake kills more people in Australia then any other snake so again LQ while extremely venomous lives in remote places and death's are rare. Most venomous doesn't mean the deadliest


----------



## catfishrod69 (Feb 24, 2012)

Yep i completely understand that. The way i go by it though really doesnt count human contact, or that humans even exist. I figure whatever is the deadliest, is the most dangerous. Wether people ever see one or not. Im not arguing with you at all, or saying your wrong, this is just my opinion.


----------



## BigJ999 (Feb 24, 2012)

Well with regards to that LQ's/Deathstalkers have very powerful venom they are capable of killing but they live in remote area's much like the Inland Taipan. Saw-scaled vipers are dangerous because they have a bad temper and are highly venomous and are found around human settlements. A.Australis same way its not the most venomous but its larger then a LQ more venom not as toxic as a LQ but still way way up there. Tityus sp are responsible for many death's in their range and ive heard some suggest they might be just as if not more toxic then a LQ. Studies need to be done on their venom more


----------



## Jeremy7 (Feb 24, 2012)

What about androctonus mauretanicus, or androctonus crassicauda, where do they rank?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## BigJ999 (Feb 24, 2012)

Well given their contact with people likely the same as A.Australis I just used A.australis because its the most well known of the androctonus. Plus Androctonus amoreuxi I imagine is about the same as well with regards to that I should have just said Androctonus spp. lol


----------



## snippy (Feb 25, 2012)

catfishrod69 said:


> I figure whatever is the deadliest, is the most dangerous. Wether people ever see one or not.


By the very definition danger/risk accounts for the probability that that certain act will occur. So what you are talking about is not being dangerous in a stronger sense, but the potential outcome of that dangerous situation.
The risk of humans getting killed by any scorpion without any scorpion being around is nil - it is not dangerous at all 

However in case of deadly I feel it is something totally different. When someone talks about something being deadly it does usually just mean it's potential for killing. So that would be the one part of "being dangerous", the part that you meant, too.

Regards
Finn


----------



## 2nscorpx (Feb 25, 2012)

Most deaths occur in Latin America, particularly in parts of Mexico and Brazil...I could see _Centuroides elegans, Tityus bahiensis, Tityus stigmurus, Tityus trinitatis_ on that list, and these are the ones I am certain because of high mortality/morbidity rates.


----------



## BigJ999 (Feb 25, 2012)

Well Tityus are well known killers in south america they like the LQ are small but pack one hell of a punch venom wise. I think the issue with third world countries is lack of good medical care for highly venomous species like Tityus and Androctonus. The snake that causes most of the fatalities down that way is actually the genus bothrops like the Jararaca,Urutu,Common lancehead kill more people then any other snake in south america.


----------



## catfishrod69 (Feb 25, 2012)

I understand that. I just meant that he wanted to know the most deadly. But i see it as those scorpions are deadly wether people are around them, or even if humans didnt exist, they would still be that deadly. 





snippy said:


> By the very definition danger/risk accounts for the probability that that certain act will occur. So what you are talking about is not being dangerous in a stronger sense, but the potential outcome of that dangerous situation.
> The risk of humans getting killed by any scorpion without any scorpion being around is nil - it is not dangerous at all
> 
> However in case of deadly I feel it is something totally different. When someone talks about something being deadly it does usually just mean it's potential for killing. So that would be the one part of "being dangerous", the part that you meant, too.
> ...


----------



## BigJ999 (Feb 25, 2012)

I tend to go on the number of people killed by a species Tityus spp. kills a lot of people most children and the infirm ect. Androctonus kill's a lot of people but the LQ's isolation is what effects its rating to me not its venom that's extremely toxic. To me if your going to do a deadliest anything list do it based on fatalities instead of venom toxicity or potency. To me among the most dangerous snakes in the world is the Russel's viper its got big fangs,lot's of highly toxic venom and a nasty nasty temperament.


----------



## 2nscorpx (Feb 26, 2012)

BigJ999 said:


> I tend to go on the number of people killed by a species Tityus spp. kills a lot of people most children and the infirm ect. Androctonus kill's a lot of people but the LQ's isolation is what effects its rating to me not its venom that's extremely toxic. To me if your going to do a deadliest anything list do it based on fatalities instead of venom toxicity or potency. To me among the most dangerous snakes in the world is the Russel's viper its got big fangs,lot's of highly toxic venom and a nasty nasty temperament.


Here, though, you are talking about the genus Androctonus and the species Leiurus quinquestraitus. The genus Androctonus should logically cause more fatalities than the single species. This is not always true, of course, but both are highly venomous, so the comparison should be fair...also, some Androctonus spp. share the same locality as L. quinquestraitus.

Mortality rates in Brazil are increasing because of this one "_Tityus stigmurus_"...anyone ever heard of _that_ scorpion? Centruroides (especially _C. elegans, C. infamatus, C. noxius, C. limpidus, C. suffusus, C. tecomanus, C. meisei, C. ornatus, C. balsasensis_, and a lot of subspecies!) cause a high mortality rate in Latin America as well.


----------



## BigJ999 (Feb 26, 2012)

I have a Tityus stigmurus i thought Tityus serrulatus was the most dangerous one in Brazil but I guess its not now. I guess the main issue with the Tityus spp is its parthenogenetic and highly venomous but like you said they spread quickly. Gotta say for being on the small side Tityus spp cause a lot of trouble in the range also thanks for letting me know about the increasing mortality rate due to T.stigmurus I figured with its venom toxicity it would be number one or number two cause of fatalities in Brazil. Some research on the genus Tityus http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1216974/pdf/8611151.pdf


----------



## 2nscorpx (Feb 26, 2012)

BigJ999 said:


> I have a Tityus stigmurus i thought Tityus serrulatus was the most dangerous one in Brazil but I guess its not now. I guess the main issue with the Tityus spp is its parthenogenetic and highly venomous but like you said they spread quickly. Gotta say for being on the small side Tityus spp cause a lot of trouble in the range also thanks for letting me know about the increasing mortality rate due to T.stigmurus I figured with its venom toxicity it would be number one or number two cause of fatalities in Brazil. Some research on the genus Tityus http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1216974/pdf/8611151.pdf


I'm glad you have an interest in the scientific publications!

Anyway, I would say _Tityus serrulatus_ and _Tityus bahiensis_ are more venomous than _T. stigmurus_. Mortality rates have just been going up because of deforestation. _T. stigmurus_ is still extremely venomous, I am not saying that it is not. Michiel Cozijn told me 'Although all Tityus species are considered medically important, some are more venomous than others.' That is something I remember very well. Also highly venomous species (that are in the hobby circuit) are _Tityus trivittatus, T. confluens, T. zulianus, T. trinitatis,_ blah, blah, blah.


----------



## BigJ999 (Feb 26, 2012)

I'll be honest they all seem about the same to me I don't go with the whole LD50 value thing its too subjective you know. Yeah ive noticed the genus Tityus has more and more likely highly venomous species be discovered every year. But yes I figured the cutting of the forest would likely force these Tityus spp into urban area's and they are very adaptable so they would thrive in a urban setting. I'll be honest though Tityus has some of the best looking but highly venomous species ive seen they vary in color although im not sure about toxicity. My T.stigmurus kills a roach instantly with its sting and that got me to respect the Tityus genus even more  I want a Tityus serrulatus though I have a hard time finding any Tityus in the hobby besides the one I already have and  Tityus serrulatus.


----------



## 2nscorpx (Feb 26, 2012)

Tityus spp. are beautiful, that is one reason I like them as well. I know for certain that Tityus stigmurus, T. serrulatus, T. bastosi, T. silvestris, T. asthenes, T. obscurus, T. simonsi (=T. ecuadorensis), and T. zulianus are in the U.S. Tityus mattogrossensis is the species I especially like, as well as others that are unfortunately not in the hobby. Also, T. trivittatus, T. confluens, T. bahiensis, T. nematochirus, T. fasciolatus, T. tayrona, T. ocelote are species in the hobby that are very photogenic.

As for "not as venomous" Tityus spp., I know T. bastosi, T. ocelote, T. tayrona, T. aff. tamayoi, T. ecuadorensis are not as "venomous" as others...I'm no expert though...


----------



## BigJ999 (Feb 26, 2012)

Well I see what you ment when you started mentioning the other Tityus spp. in the hobby lol. Pretty all the one's you mentioned are either highly venomous or are thought be of medical significance. I think thing that makes T.stigmurus and T. serrulatus so dangerous is the fact they can multiply very fast and unfortunately their venom's are very very slimier and unfortunately both have extremely toxic venom. The killing power of that venom kill's a roach pretty much instantly no struggle at all from the prey just ceases to live. People can complain that its inhuman to feed live to anything but the Tityus spp. have the lethal injection down


----------



## 2nscorpx (Feb 27, 2012)

Yep, it makes you respect the species! What do you mean by 'slimier' venom? As you said, it is too bad that the more "venomous" species are usually the most beautiful ones, I think T. trivittatus and T. confluens are some of the nicer specices, but they are so venomous!


----------



## BigJ999 (Feb 27, 2012)

That species ive never heard of  T. trivittatus or T. confluens yeah ive noticed the hotter it is the more beautiful it is. I just read that T.confluens was responsible for the death's of 4 children  Its still a species I would like though despite its extremely venomous nature but the fact its caused fatalities is sad  here something on its toxicity http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18983868 I ment their toxins are very much the same between T.stigmurus and T. serrulatus both can be fatal both have extremely toxic venom.


----------



## The Snark (Feb 27, 2012)

BigJ999 said:


> I tend to go on the number of people killed by a species Tityus spp. kills a lot of people most children and the infirm ect. Androctonus kill's a lot of people but the LQ's isolation is what effects its rating to me not its venom that's extremely toxic. To me if your going to do a deadliest anything list do it based on fatalities instead of venom toxicity or potency. To me among the most dangerous snakes in the world is the Russel's viper its got big fangs,lot's of highly toxic venom and a nasty nasty temperament.


Back to the MMO, Means, Method and Opportunity. The term 'Deadliest' needs to be defined accurately: the animal's natural prey, the LD50, or humans. As for the Russells viper, one was coiled near our door in the dark and tagged my other's pants leg without any provocation other than proximity. But then the average rattlesnake would have acted the same way. The Russells is among the top 4 people killers because of it's proximity to humans. Drop a normal rattlesnake 'nest' as found in the Southwest in northern India and people would be dropping like flies.
With the scorpion, the main reason people get tagged is their penchant for hiding in things that people handle. A pile of bricks that have a hole down the center next door to us turned up 7 scorpions. So we are basically talking about scorpion population density in human populated areas combined with how dangerous their toxin is, yes?


----------



## BigJ999 (Feb 27, 2012)

Yeah that's a good point I gotta say Russells viper does sound like one nasty customer from what you have just said. So more or less your saying is that the highly venomous scorpions hide in places people stick their hands or objects they pick up. Again your right about the populations in mingling the highly venomous scorpions and the high population isn't a good mix. So what species gives you the most trouble there?? I know krait's are the silent killers of that region as are monocled cobra's and the very well known Russells viper which from what you said would bite someone just for existing in the same area.


----------



## 2nscorpx (Feb 27, 2012)

BigJ999 said:


> That species ive never heard of  T. trivittatus or T. confluens yeah ive noticed the hotter it is the more beautiful it is. I just read that T.confluens was responsible for the death's of 4 children  Its still a species I would like though despite its extremely venomous nature but the fact its caused fatalities is sad  here something on its toxicity http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18983868 I ment their toxins are very much the same between T.stigmurus and T. serrulatus both can be fatal both have extremely toxic venom.


I've got that article already, beat you to it. I would also check out the journal _Toxicon_. I've got 'General biochemical and immunological characterization of the venom from the scorpion _Tityus trivittatus_ of Argentina' from that journal. Hell of a title! It's almost as if they were trying to make it as long as possible. I would also check out the _Journal of Arachnology_, there is a paper on parthenogenesis in T. trivittatus. Might I ask, what species have you never heard of?

@the snark, I agree. I was thinking a similar thing, that 'deadliest' has to be well-defined.


----------



## PatrickM (Feb 27, 2012)

Ken the Bug Guy has Tityus serrulatus for sale right now. 

http://www.kenthebugguy.com/pet-scorpions-for-sale/tityus-serrulatus-hot-babies.html


----------



## BigJ999 (Feb 27, 2012)

You did beat me to it lol yeah they seem to make it needlessly complicated for no reason at all. I think im finding most highly venomous Tityus spp. to be rather highly venomous and some have venom that is more then a 5/5 rating.


----------



## The Snark (Feb 27, 2012)

BigJ999 said:


> Yeah that's a good point I gotta say Russells viper does sound like one nasty customer from what you have just said. So more or less your saying is that the highly venomous scorpions hide in places people stick their hands or objects they pick up. Again your right about the populations in mingling the highly venomous scorpions and the high population isn't a good mix. So what species gives you the most trouble there?? I know krait's are the silent killers of that region as are monocled cobra's and the very well known Russells viper which from what you said would bite someone just for existing in the same area.


With scorps very common around here, we follow the rule of not grabbing anything or putting your hand anywhere without being able to give it a full visual inspection. Finding a Chinese water scorp perched on the door knob one morning cemented this rule in stone.
Our problematic local critters are the big 4 snakes, -O. Hannah, Kaouthai, Russells and Krait-, the giant red centipede (pretty common), Siamensis, the big black Het and the aforementioned water scorp. There is also a giant caterpillar and the blue caterpillar that can lay the average person to whale poop. Probably, the most hazardous encounters wise, are the scorps as they can be encountered at any time and when disturbed are always ready to go to guns, and the caterpillars which require only the slightest physical contact the envenomate.

Kraits: Mostly a problem in the late evenings, Very laconic during the day. Russells: pretty much identical to rattlesnakes attitude and strike ability wise, Kaouthai and Hannah want nothing to do with people and will almost always zoom off. Siamensis tends to coil and get pissed off rather than zoom so it offers a unique hazard.


----------



## voldemort (Feb 27, 2012)

The Snark said:


> Chinese water scorp ....


can you post some pics?


----------



## The Snark (Feb 28, 2012)

voldemort said:


> can you post some pics?


This was the one on the doorknob






Important safety tip: Always turn on lights when going downstairs at night. (It was right at the bottom of the stairs)


----------



## BigJ999 (Feb 28, 2012)

The Snark said:


> With scorps very common around here, we follow the rule of not grabbing anything or putting your hand anywhere without being able to give it a full visual inspection. Finding a Chinese water scorp perched on the door knob one morning cemented this rule in stone.
> Our problematic local critters are the big 4 snakes, -O. Hannah, Kaouthai, Russells and Krait-, the giant red centipede (pretty common), Siamensis, the big black Het and the aforementioned water scorp. There is also a giant caterpillar and the blue caterpillar that can lay the average person to whale poop. Probably, the most hazardous encounters wise, are the scorps as they can be encountered at any time and when disturbed are always ready to go to guns, and the caterpillars which require only the slightest physical contact the envenomate.
> 
> Kraits: Mostly a problem in the late evenings, Very laconic during the day. Russells: pretty much identical to rattlesnakes attitude and strike ability wise, Kaouthai and Hannah want nothing to do with people and will almost always zoom off. Siamensis tends to coil and get pissed off rather than zoom so it offers a unique hazard.


Kraits but which species given where you live i imagine the highly venomous many-banded krait and the common krait cause a lot of the fatalities plus their bite is pretty much painless as their venom is neurotoxin. Yes a Russlls viper would be our equivalent to say a eastern diamondback rattlesnake or maybe canebrake in some area's I imagine the issue with them isn't just the size but the fact they have rather complex venom's that very from region to region. Making anti-venom rather ineffective on some bites from other regions and such a big issue.

---------- Post added 02-27-2012 at 11:53 PM ----------

That scorp almost looks like some kind of Tityus spp. but im guessing its a Hottentotta spp.


----------



## The Snark (Feb 28, 2012)

[/COLOR]





BigJ999 said:


> Kraits but which species given where you live i imagine the highly venomous many-banded krait and the common krait cause a lot of the fatalities plus their bite is pretty much painless as their venom is neurotoxin. Yes a Russlls viper would be our equivalent to say a eastern diamondback rattlesnake or maybe canebrake in some area's I imagine the issue with them isn't just the size but the fact they have rather complex venom's that very from region to region. Making anti-venom rather ineffective on some bites from other regions and such a big issue.


Around here we gots the Black and White and Black and Yellow banded kraits. Not sure if either is the 'many banded'. I've been given the impression they are max dangerous due to combined circumstances: 1, in the evenings they are attracted to activity where they do the ambush thing. Their main victims being other snakes out on the prowl and drunk revelers around campfires. 2. They bite and hang on pretty tenaciously, pumping in the venom. The krait modus operendi being one bite of another snake and hang on until it quits wriggling then find the head or tip of the tail and swallow. And 3, way up there LD50 in the toxicity. 
As I understand it, the Russells venom changes dependent upon local temperature. In the warmer areas it is primarily a neurotoxin while in the colder areas. the Tibetan foothills and up in China it has additional ?hematotoxin? to aid in digestion. 
The opposite end of the attack spectrum is the big black het. scorps around here. I've watched them grab a small mouse, and a couple of geckos and sting well over a hundred times. They rewrite the book on belligerent whamming.


----------



## BigJ999 (Feb 28, 2012)

Oh I think you have the many-banded krait then they have many bands of black and white and black  in color and have extremely toxic but slow acting venom. It sounds like your scorps do over kill lol mine only needs to sting its prey once but i guess they make sure to kill it. It sounds like you also have just the banded krait which is rather large with yellow and black bands while not near as toxic as the many-banded krait it could still kill someone.


----------



## The Snark (Feb 28, 2012)

BigJ999 said:


> Oh I think you have the many-banded krait then they have many bands of black and white and black  in color and have extremely toxic but slow acting venom. It sounds like your scorps do over kill lol mine only needs to sting its prey once but i guess they make sure to kill it. It sounds like you also have just the banded krait which is rather large with yellow and black bands while not near as toxic as the many-banded krait it could still kill someone.


(Major apologies for hijacking this thread for a moment!!)
The following link is a picture perfect example of krait ID confusion. The pictured snake, bungarus multi multi, many banded, has the white bands connecting on the belly in places like the Lao Wolf snake. It also goes from yellow bands to white bands. All that noise aside, the spinal ridge scale as can be seen in the pic is the give away: this is the 'many banded' model. This is NOT the common configuration of the northern Thailand version where the black and light bands are nearly always the same size and quite a bit broader.
http://www.snakesoftaiwan.com/Bungarus multicinctus/species_bungarus_multicinctus.htm
The following link is the typical Thai krait, Bungarus Fasciatus (Banded Krait)
http://www.thailandsnakes.com/tag/banded-krait/


----------



## voldemort (Feb 28, 2012)

The Snark said:


> This was the one on the doorknob
> 
> 
> 
> ...


looks like a Lychas mucronatus, might be wrong though. If you wanted to get rid of them I can PM you my address

mike


----------



## BigJ999 (Feb 28, 2012)

Well they are known for strong venom although I don't know much about these guys really at all. So what is your most dangerous scorp venom wise??


----------



## The Snark (Feb 28, 2012)

voldemort said:


> looks like a Lychas mucronatus, might be wrong though. If you wanted to get rid of them I can PM you my address
> 
> mike


Is Lychas Mucronatus aka Chinese Swimming Scorp. I get rid of them escorting them out of the house with a broom. (What is with a swimming scorp that climbs trees?)


----------



## BigJ999 (Feb 28, 2012)

I think that species is of medical significance but you may have other scorps that i don't know about there. So the Russles viper sounds like a rather foul snake to be sure you have saw-scaled vipers as well??


----------



## 2nscorpx (Feb 28, 2012)

BigJ999 said:


> That scorp almost looks like some kind of Tityus spp. but im guessing its a Hottentotta spp.


In Thailand? Think about this! _Tityus_ spp. inhabit South America, and _Hottentotta_ inhabit Africa and the Middle East!



The Snark said:


> Is Lychas Mucronatus aka Chinese Swimming Scorp. I get rid of them escorting them out of the house with a broom. (What is with a swimming scorp that climbs trees?)


The scorpion does appear to be _L. mucronatus_. The "swimming scorpion" is just a common name, and is really a misnomer. This species is mainly tree-dwelling.



BigJ999 said:


> I think that species is of medical significance but you may have other scorps that i don't know about there. So the Russles viper sounds like a rather foul snake to be sure you have saw-scaled vipers as well??


_Lychas mucronatus_ is not considered medically significant. _The Scorpion Fauna_ probably has all the species found in Thailand. _Lychas mucronatus_ is probably the most "venomous" in this area, but does not really have severe systematic effects, not at all.

About the snakes, this is a very interesting discussion. At The Snark, have you ever had a bad encounter with one of your highly venomous snakes, besides the Russel's viper that you mentioned?


----------



## BigJ999 (Feb 28, 2012)

I want to know if he has encountered any of the krait species or any of the cobra's.


----------



## voldemort (Feb 28, 2012)

The Snark said:


> Is Lychas Mucronatus aka Chinese Swimming Scorp. I get rid of them escorting them out of the house with a broom. (What is with a swimming scorp that climbs trees?)


I think they are the same, check Alex' write ups about them, and you'll love them more. I was a bit confused because your earlier post stated "Chinese Water Scorpions", I thought this is a different species. 

mike


----------



## skar (Feb 28, 2012)

catfishrod69 said:


> Yep i completely understand that. The way i go by it though really doesnt count human contact, or that humans even exist. I figure whatever is the deadliest, is the most dangerous. Wether people ever see one or not. Im not arguing with you at all, or saying your wrong, this is just my opinion.


I agree. Proximity to people does not make them the most deadly. Those individuals should know it's around ,yet I believe "most deadly" should be represented as venom potency and amount delivered.


----------



## catfishrod69 (Feb 28, 2012)

I agree with you. Kinda a stupid thought. But what if you took every person on the planet, and corraled them all into a camp in Antarctica, would the scorpions not be considered deadly to them now, because they are no longer living near them? 





skar said:


> I agree. Proximity to people does not make them the most deadly. Those individuals should know it's around ,yet I believe "most deadly" should be represented as venom potency and amount delivered.


----------



## skar (Feb 28, 2012)

catfishrod69 said:


> I agree with you. Kinda a stupid thought. But what if you took every person on the planet, and corraled them all into a camp in Antarctica, would the scorpions not be considered deadly to them now, because they are no longer living near them?


Ha ya that's an extreme point but true.
To me in general, most likely to encounter and may/does kill children and elderly doesn't hold alot of ground per se.


----------



## Scorpion Tom (Feb 28, 2012)

skar said:


> Ha ya that's an extreme point but true.
> To me in general, most likely to encounter and may/does kill children and elderly doesn't hold alot of ground per se.


I agree! that example is extreme but true.
Tommy


----------



## The Snark (Feb 28, 2012)

As I mentioned, the Russells is average rattlesnake with a nastier venom, attitude and capability wise.
Encounters. I posted a few weeks ago a pic of a big black het scorp that took cover in my shoe and my giant brainfart of picking up what I thought was roadkill and turned out to be a sleepy king cobra. About two months ago I saw a cobra cruising the back yard and I dealt with it in the normal fashion: put glasses on and throw sand at it. Turned out to be the bad news little bugger, Siamensis. I posted a (crappy) pic of it.


----------

