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:
Locked Topic
Is their a land animal ever that could PREDATE on the SPANISH BULL? (no dinosaurs)
Topic Started: Jan 13 2017, 09:07 PM (7,832 Views)
hawkkeye
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Quote:
 
There was a shift towards equipping venatores more like gladiators (read: with sword and shield) towards the end of the Roman Republic.


I mean this one.

EDIT: oh, and ´like gladiators (with sword and shield)´ is pretty idiotic. Gladiators was equiped by a lot of different weapons - spears, tridents, more types of shields, cestus, nets, sometimes even throwing spears, bows, cavalry spears, martiobarbuli, etc. Yes, I know they was named after gladius - but they used a lot of different weapons.

Quote:
 
Good to see that you finally acknowledged how flawed this "reason" was.


Yes, its my fault, as I post many times. I actually expect some sort of basic intelligence from people I´m discussing something. Which is actually stupid, as you showed me many times. Thank you!

Now, here is my opinion explained in ways, that even you could (maybe) understand:

´I have no respect for an animal what can kill be killed 1 240 000 times by short spanish guys with swords, yet only managed to kill 2 of that short spanish guys.´

Ok, you can react now. I´m waiting.
Edited by hawkkeye, Jan 30 2017, 04:16 AM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Spartan
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I misremembered, the shift was from shield and sword to spear, not the other way around, and a bit later, during the first century.


Quote:
 
Up to the mid-1st century AD, reliefs depict the venatores equipment as similar to that of heavily armed gladiators: they wore loincloths or tunics, helmets, legwrappings and often greaves, and the short manica armguard; they also carried large shields and swords or spears. The shields were square, as a rule, but could also be round or oval. Even a venator dressed in scale armour can be seen in one of the reliefs. There is an opinion that it is gladiators, not venatores, who are fighting with beasts in these reliefs."9 If so, it means that until the mid-1st century AD heavily armed gladiators sometimes fought with wild beasts in a type of disorderly carnage, and that various types of gladiators could be involved.


Quote:
 
All the venatores are wearing tunics; one is armed with a spear, another with a double-edged sword, a third with a straight but seemingly one-edged sword (like a cutlass), and the fourth with a sabre (not a curved dagger, but a long blade sabre). The latter is especially curious, as nowhere else is a sabre
represented as a gladiator's or venator's weapon.
The venatores are shown preparing for combat: one is getting his sword out of the sheath, the other has already pulled his sword out but not yet thrown off the sheath (there is no shoulder belt or waist belt, so the sheath was undoubtedly thrown off before entering combat).


As you can see the classic gladius was not the only sword used. In addition to this one there are five other mosaics depicting venators with swords in this chapter.
It's from the book "Gladiator" by Konstantin Nossov.


Quote:
 
Yes, its my fault, as I post many times.


You tried to deny what I've said about lions and bears and even claimed I haven't shown you any accounts of other animals dying through a sword when in fact I did so in my very first response to mammuthus (?).
I understand that you tried to save your face, but simply admitting the mistake and moving on instead of this nonsensical debate would have done you better.



Quote:
 
Ok, you can react now. I´m waiting.


Again, I don't care. I still don't think that you have any meaningful comparison, but if that's your opinion you shall hold it.
At this point there is nothing more to discuss. If you can't stop yourself from leaving one last provocative comment feel free to do so, but don't expect me to reply unless you actually have something meaningful to say.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
hawkkeye
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Quote:
 
All the venatores are wearing tunics; one is armed with a spear, another with a double-edged sword, a third with a straight but seemingly one-edged sword (like a cutlass), and the fourth with a sabre (not a curved dagger, but a long blade sabre). The latter is especially curious, as nowhere else is a sabre
represented as a gladiator's or venator's weapon.
The venatores are shown preparing for combat: one is getting his sword out of the sheath, the other has already pulled his sword out but not yet thrown off the sheath (there is no shoulder belt or waist belt, so the sheath was undoubtedly thrown off before entering combat).


Finaly something I can react! But gladiators used a lot of weapons, which some of them aren´t as useful as others. But still, most of the venatores are depicted with spears. There´s some depictions of the with swords - but only few of them. I actually find more depictions of them with whips than with swords - they used whip while working with animals they couldn´t kill (for example animals that was used for mass executions).
Still, nothing against my opinion that spear is better suited for animal killing than sword and that shorter blades are better suited animal killing in body on body fights with animals than swords with longer blades. Are you agree or disagree with me? If you agree, that´s no reason to bring spear vs. sword thing 10 more times like we do this (with help of Grazier, All-Seeing-Evening-Because-Mom-Won´t-Let-Me-Awake-At-Night and others.)

EDIT: Venatores with spears or pics of death animals in arenas with spears sticking out of their bodies:
https://sites.google.com/site/romangladiatorslatinaii/_/rsrc/1338827192297/venatores/imagesCA12UC98.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8e/Sousse_mosaic_venatores.JPG
https://ourplnt.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Two-Roman-venatores-fighting-tiger-mosaic.jpg
http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/reddeadredemption/images/2/2a/Hunter.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20110607060955
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/5c/48/65/5c48658c185ea0df9950e0e920b18fac.jpg
http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/imperial-roman-fresco-of-venatores-confronting-a-lion-picture-id612294436
http://www.the-colosseum.net/images/AnimationGlad.jpg
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/2e/29/e4/2e29e456884eb3255a70341b11728655.jpg
https://image.slidesharecdn.com/animalsantiquity-120824112524-phpapp01/95/animals-in-antiquity-18-728.jpg?cb=1345807680
http://www.vdh-online.nl/gladiatoren/Pagina21.gif

EDIT2:
Venatore fighting bull with spear. Because we are talking about bulls.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--YHiDnIIItI/Tckkt4-gVzI/AAAAAAAABo0/H8hjDvxYmdo/s400/Culto-al-toro-Roma_Venatio.jpg

With swords (all shorter blades, like gladius):
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8BCJLjUP3Og/Uugq__10hdI/AAAAAAAATxk/w3ZiJLy1b5k/s1600/venatores_03.jpg
https://assets.catawiki.nl/assets/2016/7/15/d/1/1/d11e8516-4ab5-11e6-823c-0ffa5aabcde7.jpg

With whips:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-OeepWlA5X-c/TgmvXTDxqhI/AAAAAAAAAHg/ItxRp6mWA40/s400/Bestiarii_taurarii.jpg
https://followinghadrian.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/9288882495_914c242910_h.jpg%3Fw%3D640%26h%3D386

Actually, if you find any other depictions of them with swords, I would be really glad. And I mean it, because this seems interesting to me.

Quote:
 
Yes, its my fault, as I post many times.



You tried to deny what I've said about lions and bears and even claimed I haven't shown you any accounts of other animals dying through a sword when in fact I did so in my very first response to mammuthus (?).
I understand that you tried to save your face, but simply admitting the mistake and moving on instead of this nonsensical debate would have done you better.


And yet you still nitpick my quotes and show them out of context. You think could fool someone? That´s whole citation:

Quote:
 
Yes, its my fault, as I post many times. I actually expect some sort of basic intelligence from people I´m discussing something. Which is actually stupid, as you showed me many times. Thank you!

Now, here is my opinion explained in ways, that even you could (maybe) understand:

´I have no respect for an animal what can kill be killed 1 240 000 times by short spanish guys with swords, yet only managed to kill 2 of that short spanish guys.´

Ok, you can react now. I´m waiting. ´


And I´m still waiting. No opinion from you on this sentence.

Quote:
 
Again, I don't care. I still don't think that you have any meaningful comparison, but if that's your opinion you shall hold it.
At this point there is nothing more to discuss. If you can't stop yourself from leaving one last provocative comment feel free to do so, but don't expect me to reply unless you actually have something meaningful to say.


This is my meaningful comparison:
´I have no respect for an animal what can kill be killed 1 240 000 times by short spanish guys with swords, yet only managed to kill 2 of that short spanish guys.´

And still no opinions from you :/ Come on! Don´t leave battlefield before loosing battle properly!
That´s not fun in that.

EDIT: and abandoning this thread wouldn´t save your face. You would be just looking like chicken whom loose arguments.
Quock quock! Or another sound made by english chicken.
Edited by hawkkeye, Jan 30 2017, 05:50 AM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Wyvax
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Let me try to moderate here a bit, I believe it is safe to assume that spears were more popular because you could keep the animal at bay far better and lessened the risk of personal injury to the venetore. That's just common sense, doesn't mean that sword wielding never occurred in beast fights, it was probably done less often as a special match, the Romans were pretty keen on spicing up their arena fights, (you can read up on far, FAR, worse things they did in the name of "entertainment"). I also think it's safe to assume that bullfighting is probably less risky than say tiger or bear fighting. Those predators are grapplers, bulls are chargers, so they don't turn on a dime when they miss and they eventually tire out from the bloodloss what with having a bunch of swords jutting out of their backs. Sidestepping probably wouldn't work with a big cat or bear near as well. BUT, the right sword stroke in the right place could and would kill them just the same, it would be riskier but a stab or even a good slash to the throat of say even a larger brown bear would kill it VERY quickly, a decent slash with something like a longsword or katana would render a limb useless, so even longer blades would be devastating. Let's not forget for instance that nodaichi, the Japanese equivalent of great swords were used as anti cavalry weapons. Ideally you would what something that thrusts and slashes well, I'd go with an arming sword myself. But swords are lethal to beasts as long as they can reach vitals or incapacitate efficiently. I do think a bull would be easier than a bear, but that has more to do with anticipating the animals attacks, and the bull is kinda a one trick pony with a less than stellar recovery.

Anyway on topic: hunter gatherers. ;P
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
hawkkeye
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Wyvax
Jan 30 2017, 10:05 AM
Let me try to moderate here a bit, I believe it is safe to assume that spears were more popular because you could keep the animal at bay far better and lessened the risk of personal injury to the venetore. That's just common sense, doesn't mean that sword wielding never occurred in beast fights, it was probably done less often as a special match, the Romans were pretty keen on spicing up their arena fights, (you can read up on far, FAR, worse things they did in the name of "entertainment"). I also think it's safe to assume that bullfighting is probably less risky than say tiger or bear fighting. Those predators are grapplers, bulls are chargers, so they don't turn on a dime when they miss and they eventually tire out from the bloodloss what with having a bunch of swords jutting out of their backs. Sidestepping probably wouldn't work with a big cat or bear near as well. BUT, the right sword stroke in the right place could and would kill them just the same, it would be riskier but a stab or even a good slash to the throat of say even a larger brown bear would kill it VERY quickly, a decent slash with something like a longsword or katana would render a limb useless, so even longer blades would be devastating. Let's not forget for instance that nodaichi, the Japanese equivalent of great swords were used as anti cavalry weapons. Ideally you would what something that thrusts and slashes well, I'd go with an arming sword myself. But swords are lethal to beasts as long as they can reach vitals or incapacitate efficiently. I do think a bull would be easier than a bear, but that has more to do with anticipating the animals attacks, and the bull is kinda a one trick pony with a less than stellar recovery.

Anyway on topic: hunter gatherers. ;P
Actually, the first part of your topic are my opinions, too.
And, then, we have other people. There´s here even someone who wrote that men with swords drove egyptian hippos to extinction.
The second part of your statement it´s not much concern to the thread - we are only concerning matador´s sword as a weapon of slaying animals.
Some people brought gladius later. No one mention another types of swords.

And to Spartan:

´I have no respect for an animal what can kill be killed 1 240 000 times by short spanish guys with swords, yet only managed to kill 2 of that short spanish guys.´

Still no reaction from you. This mean that I win and explain my statement in a way in which is waterproof, and you chicken out because you have not any arguments/sources/logical opinions left? If you don´t answer, thank you for confirmation.

And another question you let unanswered (and I´m sure that you let it unanswered in the future):

WHY you pathetically and actually quite idiotically quoting me out of context? Like here:


Quote:
 
Quote:


Quote:
 
Yes, its my fault, as I post many times.




Quote:
 
You tried to deny what I've said about lions and bears and even claimed I haven't shown you any accounts of other animals dying through a sword when in fact I did so in my very first response to mammuthus (?).
I understand that you tried to save your face, but simply admitting the mistake and moving on instead of this nonsensical debate would have done you better.



Quote:
 
And yet you still nitpick my quotes and show them out of context. You think could fool someone? That´s whole citation:




Quote:
 
Yes, its my fault, as I post many times. I actually expect some sort of basic intelligence from people I´m discussing something. Which is actually stupid, as you showed me many times. Thank you!

Now, here is my opinion explained in ways, that even you could (maybe) understand:

´I have no respect for an animal what can kill be killed 1 240 000 times by short spanish guys with swords, yet only managed to kill 2 of that short spanish guys.´

Ok, you can react now. I´m waiting. ´




And I´m still waiting. No opinion from you on this sentence.


It´s because nothing left you except quoting me pathetically out of context? Not respond for confirmation. Thank you!

Edited by hawkkeye, Jan 30 2017, 08:27 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Ceph
Member Avatar
Piscivore

hawkkeye
Jan 30 2017, 05:46 PM
Wyvax
Jan 30 2017, 10:05 AM
Let me try to moderate here a bit, I believe it is safe to assume that spears were more popular because you could keep the animal at bay far better and lessened the risk of personal injury to the venetore. That's just common sense, doesn't mean that sword wielding never occurred in beast fights, it was probably done less often as a special match, the Romans were pretty keen on spicing up their arena fights, (you can read up on far, FAR, worse things they did in the name of "entertainment"). I also think it's safe to assume that bullfighting is probably less risky than say tiger or bear fighting. Those predators are grapplers, bulls are chargers, so they don't turn on a dime when they miss and they eventually tire out from the bloodloss what with having a bunch of swords jutting out of their backs. Sidestepping probably wouldn't work with a big cat or bear near as well. BUT, the right sword stroke in the right place could and would kill them just the same, it would be riskier but a stab or even a good slash to the throat of say even a larger brown bear would kill it VERY quickly, a decent slash with something like a longsword or katana would render a limb useless, so even longer blades would be devastating. Let's not forget for instance that nodaichi, the Japanese equivalent of great swords were used as anti cavalry weapons. Ideally you would what something that thrusts and slashes well, I'd go with an arming sword myself. But swords are lethal to beasts as long as they can reach vitals or incapacitate efficiently. I do think a bull would be easier than a bear, but that has more to do with anticipating the animals attacks, and the bull is kinda a one trick pony with a less than stellar recovery.

Anyway on topic: hunter gatherers. ;P
Actually, the first part of your topic are my opinions, too.
And, then, we have other people. There´s here even someone who wrote that men with swords drove egyptian hippos to extinction.
The second part of your statement it´s not much concern to the thread - we are only concerning matador´s sword as a weapon of slaying animals.
Some people brought gladius later. No one mention another types of swords.

And to Spartan:

´I have no respect for an animal what can kill be killed 1 240 000 times by short spanish guys with swords, yet only managed to kill 2 of that short spanish guys.´

Still no reaction from you. This mean that I win and explain my statement in a way in which is waterproof, and you chicken out because you have not any arguments/sources/logical opinions left? If you don´t answer, thank you for confirmation.

And another question you let unanswered (and I´m sure that you let it unanswered in the future):

WHY you pathetically and actually quite idiotically quoting me out of context? Like here:


Quote:
 
Quote:


Quote:
 
Yes, its my fault, as I post many times.




Quote:
 
You tried to deny what I've said about lions and bears and even claimed I haven't shown you any accounts of other animals dying through a sword when in fact I did so in my very first response to mammuthus (?).
I understand that you tried to save your face, but simply admitting the mistake and moving on instead of this nonsensical debate would have done you better.



Quote:
 
And yet you still nitpick my quotes and show them out of context. You think could fool someone? That´s whole citation:




Quote:
 
Yes, its my fault, as I post many times. I actually expect some sort of basic intelligence from people I´m discussing something. Which is actually stupid, as you showed me many times. Thank you!

Now, here is my opinion explained in ways, that even you could (maybe) understand:

´I have no respect for an animal what can kill be killed 1 240 000 times by short spanish guys with swords, yet only managed to kill 2 of that short spanish guys.´

Ok, you can react now. I´m waiting. ´




And I´m still waiting. No opinion from you on this sentence.


It´s because nothing left you except quoting me pathetically out of context? Not respond for confirmation. Thank you!

I think Spartan actually did a great job of repeatedly out debating you. You should show more dignity. I also would like to ask you to tone down the name calling. There is no place for that here. If you can't argue your position with out resorting to personal attacks, then maybe this thread has gotten over your head.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
hawkkeye
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Ceph
Jan 30 2017, 11:51 PM
hawkkeye
Jan 30 2017, 05:46 PM
Wyvax
Jan 30 2017, 10:05 AM
Let me try to moderate here a bit, I believe it is safe to assume that spears were more popular because you could keep the animal at bay far better and lessened the risk of personal injury to the venetore. That's just common sense, doesn't mean that sword wielding never occurred in beast fights, it was probably done less often as a special match, the Romans were pretty keen on spicing up their arena fights, (you can read up on far, FAR, worse things they did in the name of "entertainment"). I also think it's safe to assume that bullfighting is probably less risky than say tiger or bear fighting. Those predators are grapplers, bulls are chargers, so they don't turn on a dime when they miss and they eventually tire out from the bloodloss what with having a bunch of swords jutting out of their backs. Sidestepping probably wouldn't work with a big cat or bear near as well. BUT, the right sword stroke in the right place could and would kill them just the same, it would be riskier but a stab or even a good slash to the throat of say even a larger brown bear would kill it VERY quickly, a decent slash with something like a longsword or katana would render a limb useless, so even longer blades would be devastating. Let's not forget for instance that nodaichi, the Japanese equivalent of great swords were used as anti cavalry weapons. Ideally you would what something that thrusts and slashes well, I'd go with an arming sword myself. But swords are lethal to beasts as long as they can reach vitals or incapacitate efficiently. I do think a bull would be easier than a bear, but that has more to do with anticipating the animals attacks, and the bull is kinda a one trick pony with a less than stellar recovery.

Anyway on topic: hunter gatherers. ;P
Actually, the first part of your topic are my opinions, too.
And, then, we have other people. There´s here even someone who wrote that men with swords drove egyptian hippos to extinction.
The second part of your statement it´s not much concern to the thread - we are only concerning matador´s sword as a weapon of slaying animals.
Some people brought gladius later. No one mention another types of swords.

And to Spartan:

´I have no respect for an animal what can kill be killed 1 240 000 times by short spanish guys with swords, yet only managed to kill 2 of that short spanish guys.´

Still no reaction from you. This mean that I win and explain my statement in a way in which is waterproof, and you chicken out because you have not any arguments/sources/logical opinions left? If you don´t answer, thank you for confirmation.

And another question you let unanswered (and I´m sure that you let it unanswered in the future):

WHY you pathetically and actually quite idiotically quoting me out of context? Like here:


Quote:
 
Quote:



Quoting limited to 3 levels deep


It´s because nothing left you except quoting me pathetically out of context? Not respond for confirmation. Thank you!

I think Spartan actually did a great job of repeatedly out debating you. You should show more dignity. I also would like to ask you to tone down the name calling. There is no place for that here. If you can't argue your position with out resorting to personal attacks, then maybe this thread has gotten over your head.
I won´t name call him UNTIL he run out of arguments and start to quote me (2x times in a debate) out of context and (actually, pathetically) thinks that I didn´t notice.
He did a great job? Where? Is ignoring sources and questions good job of discussing to you? It´s quoting people out of context when you run out of logical arguments good job at discussing to you?

Read the whole discussion. I´m quite aggressive at discussion (I do it for my own amusement, at all) - but never start with personal accusations before other side started with them. I actually even attack him only as a answer on posts where he ignore/missquoting me/offending me and behave polite when he discuss like normal person (look on the post where he post me his sources about gladiators).

And missquoting me in that pathetic and idiotic way and expect me to don´t notice is offense. Ok, actually, it´s pretty amusing, but in the sake of discussion, I must take it as a offense.
Edited by hawkkeye, Jan 31 2017, 05:33 AM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Ceph
Member Avatar
Piscivore

I have been following this. It's so simple it doesn't take a multi page discussion. You made an outrageous claim that you weren't impressed by an animal because it's regularly dispatched by "shot Spanish guys". It was a silly thing to say, but whatever. He called you on your silly logic and you've been stuck defending it ever since. That sums up this entire thread. You've attempted to straw man a couple times, and basically attempted to categorize a gladius as something other than a sword. Been guilty of a bit of misquoting yourself to boot.

I would normally have minded my business and enjoyed the show, but you had to chime in with all your "winning" crap and then call him pathetic and idiotic. I have speak up. You have been heartily spanked here. You can go on believing what you will, but Spartan has not descended to name calling and you have. The victory is obvious to me.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
hawkkeye
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Ceph
Jan 31 2017, 05:36 AM
I have been following this. It's so simple it doesn't take a multi page discussion. You made an outrageous claim that you weren't impressed by an animal because it's regularly dispatched by "shot Spanish guys". It was a silly thing to say, but whatever. He called you on your silly logic and you've been stuck defending it ever since. That sums up this entire thread. You've attempted to straw man a couple times, and basically attempted to categorize a gladius as something other than a sword. Been guilty of a bit of misquoting yourself to boot.

I would normally have minded my business and enjoyed the show, but you had to chime in with all your "winning" crap and then call him pathetic and idiotic. I have speak up. You have been heartily spanked here. You can go on believing what you will, but Spartan has not descended to name calling and you have. The victory is obvious to me.
As I wrote many times, my dear cephalopod, my quote explained to the bone is:

´I have no respect for an animal what can kill be killed 1 240 000 times by short spanish guys with swords, yet only managed to kill 2 of that short spanish guys´

Now, show me where I´m wrong. And what of this is silly logic.

I´m not categorize gladius out of the sword. I only say that when I talking about sword, I´m talking about matador´s sword, and when I´m talking about gladius, I´m talking about... Suprisingly, gladius as a weapon of Roman legionairies. The definition of the terms is the first thing you must make clear in discussion, in scientific work, etc. This is my opinion. Yet, it´s seem silly logic to you.

You think that this https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/71/Uncrossed_gladius.jpg/220px-Uncrossed_gladius.jpg and this https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/6e/29/62/6e2962e4bb3747774257056c448fecf4.jpg are the same weapon? They look same to you? I´m talking now only about look, not evem of blade lenght differences. You think that fight is same with them?
Yes, they are both swords. And yet, they are drastically different. Which seems silly logic to you.
I categorize gladius as something different from matador´s sword - not even in terms of look or blade lenght, but also in fighting style. For example, matador´s sword is used without shield against bulls, gladius was used with shield, on depiction against bears and big cats or enemies of Roman empire.

But, according to you, as you wrote post before, they are both swords, aren´t they? They are just same to you and wroting about them as a different kinds of weapons is silly logic.
Edited by hawkkeye, Jan 31 2017, 07:05 AM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Wyvax
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
I'm pretty sure that our hoplite friend was talking about swords in general being deadly towards animals not how efficient an individual variety of sword is against any said animals. A matadors sword would be suicidal against a bear of course and you can't "OLÉ!" a big cat or bear very well. You'd need a different sword and a different style, but I bet that a matador could probably use their technique on a wild bovid like a buffalo or bison, that doesn't make them less impressive. The bull dies from exhaustion and blood loss, last I checked you could kill pretty much most animals that way.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Vodmeister
Member Avatar
Ultimate Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
You'd think that the Spanish bull was a rhino judging by some of these comments.

A polar bear or large brown bear would beat one fairly easily. Lions and tigers would prey on them. I'm a bit too skeptical to bet on any animal below that.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
hawkkeye
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
The All-seeing Night
Jan 31 2017, 10:01 AM
Quote:
 
But, according to you, as you wrote post before, they are both swords, aren´t they? They are just same to you and wroting about them as a different kinds of weapons is silly logic.
Can you get through one comment without building a strawman?

And quit being butt hurt he called your logic silly.
ALL-SEEING -EVENING-BECAUSE-MOM-WOULDNT-LET-YOU-AWAKE-AT NIGHT!!!

Finally, welcome and feel yourself as home!

If I´m strawman, are you Dorothy?

I´m not butthurt I´m amused:)
Come, you evening creature in pyjamas, show me my logic flaws!

Are you think, according to your exalted and everlasting experience with swordfighting, that they are the same? When you killing thousand of enemies with gladius, how you feel? You do it in the same way like when killing thousand enemies with matador´s sword?

Come on, don´t be afraid and show me your knowledge
:)

PS: you never actually show logic holes in something. You always just post amusing despising comment and just waiting to people let you get away with.
But I´m asking you - as I did with my opinions, explain yours opinions to me. Or are you afraid to do it?

Quote:
 
I'm pretty sure that our hoplite friend was talking about swords in general being deadly towards animals not how efficient an individual variety of sword is against any said animals. A matadors sword would be suicidal against a bear of course and you can't "OLÉ!" a big cat or bear very well. You'd need a different sword and a different style, but I bet that a matador could probably use their technique on a wild bovid like a buffalo or bison, that doesn't make them less impressive. The bull dies from exhaustion and blood loss, last I checked you could kill pretty much most animals that way.


No they are not. They are just slaughtering frightened cattle, about which they trying to create aura of dangerousness. And they do it in the rate 1 240 000 to
2. For 316 years with minimal losses, with injury rate smaller than in ice hockey. There´s something stinking in kingdom of bullfighting.
Edited by hawkkeye, Jan 31 2017, 05:38 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
The All-seeing Night
Member Avatar
You are without honor
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
Are you think, according to your exalted and everlasting experience with swordfighting, that they are the same?
And there's another strawman. So to answer my own question: nope.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
hawkkeye
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
The All-seeing Night
Jan 31 2017, 06:15 PM
Quote:
 
Are you think, according to your exalted and everlasting experience with swordfighting, that they are the same?
And there's another strawman. So to answer my own question: nope.
Where is the strawman, Dorothy?

I ask you to explain your opinions, but you never do it.

Actually, your post are always amusing (and thank you for that!), but never valuable to discussion. And if someone point it to you, you:

1.) don´t answer at all. Why? Because you know that only strawmen are on your side and are you too much afraid of me to answer? Why? We´re just discussing on the internet - I´m not going to beat you, or taking your morning cocoa!

2.) yelling strawman in rate like whaler who´s see group of fat sperm whales. Yet, whaler show the whales to his comrades - you never actually show your strawmen to other people. Why? As I point in first option of your behaviour, there´s no reason to be afraid:) If strawmen exist.

Maybe your strawmen are like slenderman and not exist.

Except the strawmen in your posts. Which you acknowledged by not answering any of my questions and ignoring pretty much any of my opinions and explanation.

:)
Edited by hawkkeye, Jan 31 2017, 07:36 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Wyvax
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
hawkkeye
 
No they are not. They are just slaughtering frightened cattle, about which they trying to create aura of dangerousness. And they do it in the rate 1 240 000 to
2. For 316 years with minimal losses, with injury rate smaller than in ice hockey. There´s something stinking in kingdom of bullfighting.


I'm not sure what you're referring to. No swords are not deadly to animals? (Mind you I've been referring to swords in general not any specific type for the length of this discussion.) Or no the Spanish bull is not an impressive animal?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Zoological Debate & Discussion · Next Topic »
Locked Topic