| 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: |
| Visual Comparisons Thread | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 7 2012, 01:17 AM (507,254 Views) | |
| SpinoInWonderland | Oct 6 2012, 04:47 PM Post #796 |
|
The madness has come back...
  ![]](http://b2.ifrm.com/28122/87/0/p701956/pipright.png)
|
I never thought of a tiger being that large compared to a rhino... |
 |
 
|
| Superpredator | Oct 6 2012, 04:57 PM Post #797 |
Apex Predator
|
Agreed, I was VERY surprised when I saw this! |
|
|
|
| 221Extra | Oct 6 2012, 05:00 PM Post #798 |
Deny, deny, deny.
|
|
|
|
|
| Neofelis | Oct 6 2012, 09:31 PM Post #799 |
Heterotrophic Organism
|
Wait what... 
|
|
|
|
| Neofelis | Oct 6 2012, 09:31 PM Post #800 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
|
Wait what...
|
|
|
|
| Nocturnal | Oct 6 2012, 09:58 PM Post #801 |
Autotrophic Organism
|
Silly photoshopped nonsense. Scaling two animals from positions with different distance to the camera to the same distance is not only leaving out the fact that we don't know how far the two animals in question are actually apart from each other, but it also leaves room for imagination and the wish how big one of those particular animals should look in the photoshoppers opinion. in this case it's apparent the photoshopper wanted the tiger to be very large, so he made him very large. a tiger like this would be like 140 or 150 cm tall. it's out of question the actual size of this tiger is utterly exaggerated. |
|
|
|
| boldchamp | Oct 7 2012, 01:40 AM Post #802 |
|
Omnivore
|
That was P.Tigris`s assumption of how big the tiger should be, supposedly based upon how far away it was. It, really, though, is impossible to tell. |
|
|
|
| theropod | Oct 7 2012, 05:32 AM Post #803 |
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
|
This seems not really like an argument against including several versions of what people imagine it to look like. Even the most widely acknowledged reconstruction is a guess, And if there indeed is one at all I´d imagine it to be published by a scientist in a paper or on his/her site, not in a documentary. Do you think any reconstruction in a case solely consisting of teeth and some centra one reconstruction has so much credential that it invalidates any other restoration, even considering the uncertainity and inconsistence about its size and thus its proportions? NO WAY! But including pictures from documentarys is a really bad idea and it is rather pointless to use the BBC version as an alternative reconstruction. using an upscaled gws and a scientists drawing of a bulky megalodon would be the best imo, as it would show the approximate range of it´s possible appearances. |
|
|
|
| linnaeus1758 | Oct 7 2012, 09:30 AM Post #804 |
Omnivore
|
|
|
|
|
| linnaeus1758 | Oct 7 2012, 10:14 AM Post #805 |
|
Omnivore
|
|
|
|
|
| Sicilianu | Oct 7 2012, 01:19 PM Post #806 |
Omnivore
|
Cool orang picture. |
|
|
|
| Superpredator | Oct 7 2012, 01:38 PM Post #807 |
|
Apex Predator
|
@Boldchamp/Nocturnal - you must make the Tiger smaller, mustn't you? |
|
|
|
| Nocturnal | Oct 7 2012, 07:46 PM Post #808 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
|
No, it's the other way around. You are frantically making the tiger with photoshopped pictures bigger than they are to suit your preconceived opinion. It's apparent you don't know about the size of these animals and you are probably too young and unexperienced to recognize frauds in pictures like these. You are not open to anything that might help you to find the right way and that is very disappointing. But it also explains your considerably blind eye on this subject. I can't speak for boldchamp, but he's not that bad. Yes i strongly disagree with his opinion of lions winning 9 out of 10 times against tigers, but he really knows a lot about these animals and he has a lot of data. He probably knows more than anyone else on this forum about the size of tigers and lions. You lack even the most basic knowledge, so you should start from scratch and try to learn about your preferred animal. Don't use wikipedia or 100 year old hunter stories that you probably take for real. Even if you don't like it, but you can always ask boldchamp to explain you a few things. he's a good guy and very polite. Give him a chance. Edited by Nocturnal, Oct 7 2012, 07:48 PM.
|
|
|
|
| boldchamp | Oct 7 2012, 10:45 PM Post #809 |
|
Omnivore
|
Nope......just can`t put much faith in a tigerfans take on a tiger`s size by editing the pic and making his own guess (based upon who knows what) as to the size of the tiger. |
|
|
|
| boldchamp | Oct 7 2012, 10:50 PM Post #810 |
|
Omnivore
|
Thanks, Nocturnal. And, nice, linnaeus1758 |
|
|
|
| 2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Video & Image Gallery · Next Topic » |
6:05 PM Jul 13
