Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Carnivora. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Have anybody here seen "Ultimate Animals" in NAT Geo Wild?; Do you believe all those facts of animals ?
Topic Started: Jul 17 2015, 03:21 PM (2,873 Views)
WaveRiders_
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Warsaw2014
Oct 2 2015, 05:50 AM
It’s ok for all Mazak’s documents (I have all of them), I meant where did you get the original statement in Russian from Jankowski and the sentence in Russian you now posted. Is it in Slaght et al. (2005)?

" I meant where did you get the original statement in Russian from Jankowsk"
From Jankowski Book:
http://coollib.net/b/261421/read
Posted Image
" Is it in Slaght et al. (2005)?"
No ,however this is crucial sentence in Slaght et al. (2005):"Большинство морфологических изменений приводимых В .Мазаком (Mazak 1967,1981) касается шкуры и черепа."(On page 29)
http://fishowls.com/Slaght%20et%20al%202005.pdf

Thank you Warsaw.

With all due respect I have particularly for people passed away it has always been difficult to accept that record from Jankowski of a 11 ft 6 inches over curves Amur tiger shot in 1943 reported by V. Mazak in a number of his writings including the book “Der Tiger”, also because in my opinion no wild tiger (or lion) record in general at that length in the flesh over curves has ever been proved or can be retained reliable and accurate.

Jankowski father apparently claimed to have shot a 13 feet Amur male tiger measured over curves on a frozen carcase and a 11 ft 8 inches female Amur tiger measured over curves. And also he apparently claimed he saw an old man-eating tiger measuring 12 ft 8 inches over curves shot by some Korean hunters. Once anyone makes those kind of statements unfortunately he looses all or most of his credibility. It is inevitable. Therefore I always put the supposed 11 ft 6 inches male from Sungari River shot in 1943 measured over curves in the limbo of unreliable records with only a tiny possibility of being considered.

Although it should be reminded that Mazak has several merits including the one to have clarified the weights of those Amur tigers shot in the Morden-Graves North Asiatic expedition (Morden 1930; Goodwin, 1933) as well as how those animals have been measured through his epistular correspondence with Goodwin (Mazak, 1967, 1983), Mazak unfortunately appears to loose some points in this Sungari River Amurr tiger length issue.

I believe Mazak should have informed the reader of an inconsistency between what it is written in Jankowski book and what is written in the mail he received from Jankowski. For some reasons Mazak did not and this is not acceptable. You have a book from the primary source, you have a mail from the primary source that nobody can check (apparently, maybe J. H. Mazak or somebody else will be able to find it) and you have a claim from a scientist different from that of the primary source. Considering that the primary source’s family claimed to have shot tigers of totally unrealistic lengths, that the scientist in question, with all due respect, has been found by his peers to have mixed a little bit too much reliable and unreliable historical body size/weight records (for sure not the only zoologist even in recent time) and that he also mixed wild and captive skull measurements in his analyses, I am now inclined to completely reject even that tiny possibility that I had always conceded to that 11ft 6 inches Amur tiger shot by Jankowski in 1943 close to the Sungari River to be acceptable. As it now seems proved to me it was a skin measurement I would say that the tiny possibility I had conceded shrinked to zero.

It also seems that the primary source, Jankowski, never wrote in his book that the brown bear eaten by that tiger a few days earlier then being shot was killed as a result from an evident fight with the tiger that the bear had lost and that the bear was a very large male as stated by Mazak (1983). Maybe Mazak assumed a large head implied a very large male. A bit too much freedom in his interpretation.

Anyway, I am aware you may have discussed those issues in the past. From my side the case is now fully clear.
Edited by WaveRiders_, Oct 2 2015, 10:38 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Warsaw2014
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Warsaw2014
Jul 31 2015, 04:54 AM
pckts
Jul 30 2015, 02:29 AM
Warsaw2014
Jul 29 2015, 04:41 AM
"No its not, its a translation from the source shown just like the other translation that says the tiger killed and ate a male brown bear"

You really don't understand what really primary source mean.
Considering they are first hand or letters written from the eye witness means they are...
Primary sources.

"A primary source is a document or physical object which was written or created during the time under study. These sources were present during an experience or time period and offer an inside view of a particular event. Some types of primary sources include:"

They are once again, Primary Sources.
Considering they are first hand or letters written from the eye witness means they are...
Primary sources.

"A primary source is a document or physical object which was written or created during the time under study. These sources were present during an experience or time period and offer an inside view of a particular event. Some types of primary sources include:"

They are once again, Primary Sources.


No,
Here's a primary source:Tiger,deer,ginseng" by V.J .Jankovski

http://coollib.net/b/261421/read

Jankowski only wrote that the tiger had eaten the bear . It's weird to me that the original text of Jankowski book does not mention a single word about any signs of struggle between the bear and the tiger .
BTW From the same book:Tiger,deer,ginseng" by V.J .Jankovski

Jankowski described the struggle between Asiatic black bear and large wild boar

Шаг — и я поражен еще больше: поперек секача-кабана, придавив его могучим телом, лежал большой гималайский медведь! Но тут я увидел разодранный, развороченный бок вепря и все понял. Медведь только что драл крепчайшую шкуру секача: вот что я принял за треск древесной коры.

Взял за мохнатое ухо и повернул набок большую лобастую голову. Пуля вошла в затылок и вышла ниже подбородка. Она оборвала жизнь мгновенно, видимо, он не вздрогнул…
http://www.litmir.co/br/?b=181911&p=48
Peter wrote WARSAW

"It didn't take you long to respond to the questions in post 1,447, but you didn't deliver. I'll try again."


To be continued........

Ok
"When a poster responded to your post about the book of W.J. Jankowski, you said Jankowski is the primary source. V. Mazak's book is a secondary source. This means that W.J. Jankowski's remarks on the tiger are final. This means you, indirectly, said that V. Mazak lied regarding the length of the tiger and the bear eaten by the tiger."



No!
This means that W.J. Jankowski's wersion that the Tiger skin was measured is far more realistic
Освежеванного тигра выносили вдевятером. Мне досталась необезжиренная шкура, которая показалась свинцовой, на пути к палатке пришлось не раз отдыхать. Взвесить груз целиком не удалось, однако, по общему подсчету, он тянул не менее 350 килограммов. Но что удивительно — розовое жирное мясо хищника оказалось на редкость вкусным. Мы натопили несколько литров янтарного жира, на котором жарили лепешки. А мясо, законсервированное начальником лесоучастка по-японски, со специями, было просто превосходным!

Расстелив шкуру посреди чисто выметенного двора, японец скрупулезно измерил ее длину от носа до хвоста. Вышло одиннадцать с половиной футов — более чем три и три четверти метра!

Очищенные кости, почти по цене пантов, взяли китайские аптекари; шкура украсила роскошную гостиную семейства Бринер в Харбине. А огромный череп с желтоватыми клыками — с большой палец каждый — Шин подарил другу юности — моему отцу. В его богатой коллекции рогов, клыков и черепов этот занял самое почетное место.
https://www.litmir.me/br/?b=181911&p=50


Post no 26 from 2015
Jankowski (primary source) never said that the bear was a "very large male "
Here's whta Jankowski said:
"...Шин говорит: тигр оглушительно рявкнул, опрокинулся, но моментально вскочил и, в три прыжка достигнув леса, исчез, растворился в нем. Некоторое время доносился шум прыжков, ломаемых кустов, потом все стихло. На месте лежки Шин обнаружил кровь, рядом — крупную голову и остаток медвежьей лапы: видимо, властелин отдыхал после обильного завтрака..."

http://carnivoraforum.com/topic/10341695/2/
Interview with W.J .Jankowski (88 y.o) 1999
https://youtu.be/jn3VYf1q41o
This old man speaking logically .Interesting and sad story BTW.
Edited by Warsaw2014, Feb 16 2018, 12:57 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Zoological Debate & Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply