Anyone else bothered by the shallowness of this article?<p>Maybe Predators are not technically biological predators, but the biological definition isn't the only use of the word (e.g. sexual predators). Using the word "Predator" instead of "Hunter" suggests that Predators derive something essential from their activities-- it's not a sport for them, it's a way of life.<p>This article also gives too much credit to simplistic evolutionary-biological explanations of modern cultures. Assuming that Predators were shaped by evolutionary pressures like ours, then concluding that they are "failing as a species" because they are "acting against Darwinian pressures", is intellectually lazy.<p>This whole thing reminds me of the kind of pseduo-intellectual justifications historically given for slavery. They are part of a "backward" culture in some ill-defined way.<p>Whew, maybe this is an over-serious reply to this article, but I prefer to practice critical thinking when I can, especially when it comes to portraying other cultures or species (fictional or non) as backward.