A top primatologist is trying to bring some reason into the hundred men vs one gorilla debate … explaining the main reason why a fight like this wouldn’t go down — and arguing this paints these beautiful creatures in a bad light.

We spoke with Michael Stern — the former Curator of Primates at the Philadelphia Zoo with years of experience studying gorillas both in captivity and in the wild in Uganda — and, he tells us the main reason this debate is so silly is because one gorilla would look around, see it was outnumbered and take off.

Stern says this is the equivalent of asking if a unicorn could take down a dinosaur — or if a shark with a laser beam could blow up a submarine!

The gorilla would realize it was in a bad spot, and likely sprint through the nearest line of men … knocking one or two aside while trying to make a run for it — no war for the planet of the apes here. Sorry, Chris Pontius — looks like you’re wrong on this one.

Michael explains the reason people are so into this debate is because of the sheer speed and strength of gorillas — and, he admits they’re super strong creatures … but, they’re more gentle giants than fierce soldiers, and all this talk is really damaging to their rep.

For a primate that might actually do some damage to a group of men, Michael says look no further than the chimpanzee … several of which have attacked humans in the past.

Michael also talked to us about the New Nature Foundation — an organization he’s part of that is looking to stop deforestation in Africa through a variety of new technologies — in case people actually want to help primates instead of arguing about their fighting acumen. Take a listen and check out their website for more info.