Poll: Who wins?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
14 28.00%
36 72.00%
Total 50 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 4 Vote(s) - 4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Lion v Tiger
For note, you cannot use wild captive specimens for anything, anymore than you can claim fat Ligers are Atrox sized and above.
Don't back away now Ryo, when the stats are literally placed against you. If this this your idea of surrendering then I'll accept it Smile.
What are you thinking of surrendering? Do you actually disagree with the fact that Zoo specimens are unreliable due to being fat? Do you also believe in those gigantic weight sizes for those fat captive Ligers as well?

As for the rest? I can see if it laying around somewhere. But I don't need to. If you can cry "it iz tigar fan liez!" the I can use the same stupid generalization as well, since you using such a childish bad excuse of an argument means it is not worth the effort to actually convince you.
What goes one way goes the other.
Not all captive specimens are fat tho, a lot of them are simply bulky, ripped and well fed just like how a well fed, exercised human would be. Especially in Western captivities where trainers take them for regular exercises and activities so the cats can maintain their natural athleticism and stay fit. Those cats have truly lived to their size and weight potential without going obese like those 700 pounders.
But we have seen them being fat often. People also brag about the largest Liger, without giving attention to the fact it is fat as f'ck. You can't use that weight for much, nor could or would I do the same for the Tiger or any other big cat or Bear.
And those emaciated, hardship ridden wild specimens not anywhere close to reaching to their weight potential are just as unfair to be included. In fact it's far more difficult to gauge an accurate average weight from wild population since the amount of healthy, well fed prime specimens are far too few in between. Most of them are constantly struggling for food, from getting shot by local herders, competitions, disease, starvation etc, lions are now considered a Vulnerable species. The data from wild specimens can easily been sharply skewed by those less than stellar matured males. It's far more accurate to gauge a reliable and meaningful average from captivity, assuming they're not overly obese or mistreated.
You are the first person I have met who have such a crazy idea. If they are skinny in the wild, then it is not a healthy successful specimen. And we have hunted specimens and weighed them on empty stomachs as well. A successful hunter, which we would ne using, will tend to not only be less fat, but carry more muscle as well.
It is simple. Take a weight chart, weigh a lot of Lions and give the average. No one actually goes for the Zoo weights as food not only makes them fatter, but can even make them larger than what they actually are in the wild. Just because Wolves can get large in captivity, does not mean we should use those weights over the ones in the wild that are actually not human caused.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)