Search this Topic:
Mon, Mar 17, 2014 1:12 PM
Wed, Mar 19, 2014 3:51 PM
A long time ago a strange creature appeared in China and horrified and ate men and animals. The fast and fierce creature was called 'nien' (or 'nian'), which sounds like the Chinese word for 'year'. Neither the fox nor the tiger could fight the 'nien' effectively and in despair the people asked the lion for help.
Wed, Mar 19, 2014 4:10 PM
Wed, Mar 19, 2014 4:16 PM
Asad wrote:perrault wrote: This is the sort of thing spammers use when they are losing the debate .Are the pictures fake or a lion standing 6 inches taller next to a tiger?..The height at the shoulder is about 3 feet to 3 feet 6 inchesChundawat, R.S., Habib, B., Karanth, U., Kawanishi, K., Ahmad Khan, J., Lynam, T., Miquelle, D., Nyhus, P., Sunarto, S., Tilson, R. & Sonam Wang 2011. Panthera tigris. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2.http://indiabiodiversity.org/species/show/262691..They stand on all four legs at the shoulder height is about 35 to 43 in..Subspecies of tigers are traditionally defined by body size, skull characters, pelage coloration, and striping patterns (Mazak 1981; Herrington 1987).http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC534810/http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/pubs/tigers.htmhttps://sites.google.com/site/biologybfinalproject/animalia/royal-bengal-tiger-panthera-tigris-tigris..the figures of tiger population in the Bangladesh Sundarbans (official estimates range from 350 to 450 tigers; MoEF-Bangladesh 2004) are much higher than what is estimated in this study.http://threatenedtaxa.org/ZooPrintJournal/2012/February/o266626ii122370-2380.pdf..The Bengal tiger is found primarily in India .. Weight around 550 pounds.https://worldwildlife.org/species/bengal-tiger80% of tigers reside in India and they are Bengal with average height of 3 feet at the shoulder and rarely 3.6 and above, not taking the Sunderban population into account being generous.
i repeat, don’t you get tired of lies
Asad-idiot? Check this out, again:
height for lions and tigers:
* 101 cm (n=50). Range: 86-109 cm. Stevenson-Hamilton (1947) – South
* 96.2 cm (n=14). Range: 81.3 cm-107 cm. Meinertzhagen (1938) – Kenya,
* 107.1 cm (n=42) Ferreira & Funston (2010) – Location?
* 97 cm (n=?). No range. Pocock (1939).
* 114 cm Max. recorded in the Wild (Pitman, 1945).
* 112 cm. Max. recorded in captivity (Wood, 1977).
Male Bengal tigers:
* 109.3 cm (n=6). Range: 104-114 cm. Brown (1893) – Purneah, India.
* 103 cm (n=2) Range: 102-104 cm. Meinertzhagen (1938) – Southwest
* 100 cm (n=43). Range: 88-114 cm. Cooch Behar (1908) – Northeast India.
* 99 cm (n=42). Range: 91-112 cm. Brander (1923) – Central India.
* 93.3 cm (n=5). Range: 89-99 cm. Mazák (1983).
* 91 cm (n=?). No range. Pocock (1939).
* 114 cm Max. recorded in the Wild (Cooch Behar (1908) – Brown (1893)).
* 118 cm Max. recorded standing height in any big cat (Ward, 1914).
* 95 cm (n=11). Range: 82-106 cm. Kerley et al. (2005) –
Sikhote-Alin ZP, Russia.
* 102 cm (n=7). Range: 96-106 cm. Mazák (1983).
* 106 cm Max. recorded in the Wild (Kerley et al., 2005).
This are REAL measurements
of WILD lions and tigers and guess what, they are about THE SAME. This is
corroborated by Scientists like Dr Sunquist or Dr Karanth, which documents I
posted in my previous intervention and that you simple ignored because it slap
the true in your face.
By the way, what is the
point in put misleading random images of large
hybrid male lions with smaller tigers of unknown subspecies??? That is NOT science,
Asad-idiot, that is a desperate attempt to prove a false point.
Wed, Mar 19, 2014 4:20 PM
Karanth. 2003. Tiger ecology and conservation in the Indian
Sunquist. 2010. What is a tiger? Ecology and behavior.
Dinerstein. 2003. The Return of the Unicorns: The Natural History and Conservation of the
Greater One-horned Rhinoceros.
Wed, Mar 19, 2014 4:23 PM
Wed, Mar 19, 2014 4:32 PM
Amnon242 wrote:Guate: some idiots (f.e. catlion) are quite amusing (with their naive and childish lies), but others (f.e. idiot asad) are rather tiresome...arent they?
Wed, Mar 19, 2014 4:41 PM
Wed, Mar 19, 2014 5:06 PM
are right, but check the forum, the conversations are going around the same
thing and something that should be taken as a fact already is the SIZE issue.
I mean, who
many data has been posted by peter and me in the Premier League? The size issue
has been already resolved but this kind of posters (like Asad and other hard-core-lion-fans) keep coming with
the same bull....t and is like all the hard effort of good posters is
deliberately ignored, and this is disturbing at many levels.
collected literally hundreds of records and the results had been already posted
several times. Then, why this Asad-idiot keeps spamming with his/her lies and
the average values recorded at this moment:
* Bengal tigers: 282 cm in total length – 99 cm shoulder height
– 200 kg (including the Sundarbans population).
* African lion: 274 cm in total length – 100 cm shoulder height
– 160 to 190 kg (depending of the population).
* Amur tiger: 294 cm total length – 95 cm shoulder height – 189
to 217 kg (depending of the historic period).
my point, the ONLY objective of Asad-liar here is to attack the tiger
reputation and the scientists that have worked with them. Asad is like a
poacher in the internet.
Wed, Mar 19, 2014 5:50 PM
Thu, Mar 20, 2014 12:36 AM
pckts wrote:Enough of your lies, starFAKE and Asad.This is actual PROOF.None of your copy and pasted nat geo excerpts or hair brain theories. This is scientific fact.
Lions are truly the king of beasts, in both action, and looks!
Thu, Mar 20, 2014 12:38 AM
Thu, Mar 20, 2014 3:38 AM
Thu, Mar 20, 2014 4:52 AM
Thu, Mar 20, 2014 10:30 AM
Thu, Mar 20, 2014 10:59 AM
Thu, Mar 20, 2014 1:56 PM
the bold champ wrote:Guate, i don`t agree with your 174 kg average for the lion. I came up with a higher average (about 184 kg, or more now if you include the newer data), and you excluded some reliably measured lions.
Thu, Mar 20, 2014 2:01 PM
the bold champ wrote:None of those are crater lions, and you`re using selective data, anyways. The guy (can`t remember his name) that said a lion much over 400 lbs is an exceptionally heavy animal, later changed that statement, saying that they get up to 500 lbs.
Thu, Mar 20, 2014 2:07 PM
Amnon242 wrote:btw Guate: what is your profession? Are you a zoologist?
Thu, Mar 20, 2014 2:47 PM
© 2017 Yuku. All rights reserved.