Visual Comparisons Thread

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:

Pages:
1
…
57
58
59
…
113

Visual Comparisons Thread
Tweet Topic Started: Jan 7 2012, 01:17 AM (507,250 Views)
boldchamp	Nov 10 2012, 12:33 AM Post #856
Omnivore Posts: 1,028 Group: Members Member #88 Joined: Jan 15, 2012	Superpredator Nov 9 2012, 04:46 PM boldchamp Nov 9 2012, 03:23 AM Superpredator Nov 8 2012, 05:16 PM boldchamp Nov 8 2012, 04:51 PM FelinePowah Nov 6 2012, 03:13 AM k9boy Nov 5 2012, 07:12 PM ^ The tiger looks far more impressive then the lion They nearly always do Only in biased, fan-based comparisons. Tigers are more robust than Tigers and are more muscular. Problem? Lions have proportionately larger chests, while tigers have more distended stomachs. The upper limbs of the lion is lb for lb more robust, while it is the same with the lower limbs of the tiger. Tends to even out. When you compare similar sized specimens of near equal weight....you will find there is little, if any difference in robusticity. But why would we do that when TIGERS ARE BIGGER?! They are STILL similar in weight, with but a 5-8% difference. And, as for a lion without his mane not looking impressive. Well....let`s see....: Looks quite impressive to me. Edited by boldchamp, Nov 10 2012, 12:33 AM.



SameerPrehistorica	Nov 10 2012, 11:57 AM Post #857
Heterotrophic Organism Posts: 268 Group: Members Member #91 Joined: Jan 15, 2012	devang.nivatkar21 Oct 13 2012, 02:24 PM Here are some comparisons that I haven't made. I just spliced two images together. Arctodus simus vs Arcthotherium angustidens Arctotherium angustidens vs Ursus maritimus tyrannus Arctotherium angustidens vs Daeodon Arctotherium angustidens vs Megafauna Arctotherium angustidens vs Megistotherium osteothlastes Megistotherium osteothlastes vs Megafauna The actual link. https://picasaweb.google.com/117644171354877383034/CarnivoraComparisons#5798651099301967490 Seriously, I don't know what you are thinking of yourself You took my megabeasts image and used in the animal fight pictures without crediting me.You didn't credited images of others too.You cut the link in the bottom of my image which i have provided in it.. You posted it on picasa as well... What the hell ??? See how others credit it...



Superpredator	Nov 10 2012, 02:56 PM Post #858
Apex Predator Posts: 5,434 Group: Members Member #59 Joined: Jan 12, 2012	boldchamp Nov 10 2012, 12:33 AM Superpredator Nov 9 2012, 04:46 PM boldchamp Nov 9 2012, 03:23 AM Superpredator Nov 8 2012, 05:16 PM boldchamp Nov 8 2012, 04:51 PM FelinePowah Nov 6 2012, 03:13 AM k9boy Nov 5 2012, 07:12 PM ^ The tiger looks far more impressive then the lion They nearly always do Only in biased, fan-based comparisons. Tigers are more robust than Tigers and are more muscular. Problem? Lions have proportionately larger chests, while tigers have more distended stomachs. The upper limbs of the lion is lb for lb more robust, while it is the same with the lower limbs of the tiger. Tends to even out. When you compare similar sized specimens of near equal weight....you will find there is little, if any difference in robusticity. But why would we do that when TIGERS ARE BIGGER?! They are STILL similar in weight, with but a 5-8% difference. And, as for a lion without his mane not looking impressive. Well....let`s see....: Looks quite impressive to me. No they're not there is NO solid proof for Tigers being only 8% heavier. Why must you use a Lion looking up & a Tiger facing sideways?



boldchamp	Nov 10 2012, 05:55 PM Post #859
Omnivore Posts: 1,028 Group: Members Member #88 Joined: Jan 15, 2012	Superpredator Nov 10 2012, 02:56 PM boldchamp Nov 10 2012, 12:33 AM Superpredator Nov 9 2012, 04:46 PM boldchamp Nov 9 2012, 03:23 AM Superpredator Nov 8 2012, 05:16 PM boldchamp Nov 8 2012, 04:51 PM FelinePowah Nov 6 2012, 03:13 AM k9boy Nov 5 2012, 07:12 PM ^ The tiger looks far more impressive then the lion They nearly always do Only in biased, fan-based comparisons. Tigers are more robust than Tigers and are more muscular. Problem? Lions have proportionately larger chests, while tigers have more distended stomachs. The upper limbs of the lion is lb for lb more robust, while it is the same with the lower limbs of the tiger. Tends to even out. When you compare similar sized specimens of near equal weight....you will find there is little, if any difference in robusticity. But why would we do that when TIGERS ARE BIGGER?! They are STILL similar in weight, with but a 5-8% difference. And, as for a lion without his mane not looking impressive. Well....let`s see....: Looks quite impressive to me. No they're not there is NO solid proof for Tigers being only 8% heavier. Why must you use a Lion looking up & a Tiger facing sideways? There is no solid proof? I used all the data there is avoidable on the subject, to get a reliable average weight for both, and the differences in weight was between 5-8%. Is that not proof enough? And....i could have that same tiger facing sideways, if you want? Would make little difference, really. The tiger would look the same size regardless of which way it is facing.....because, well.....that doesn`t effect body size...except perhaps to the untrained eye. Edited by boldchamp, Nov 10 2012, 06:03 PM.



Superpredator	Nov 10 2012, 06:02 PM Post #860
Apex Predator Posts: 5,434 Group: Members Member #59 Joined: Jan 12, 2012	boldchamp Nov 10 2012, 05:55 PM Superpredator Nov 10 2012, 02:56 PM boldchamp Nov 10 2012, 12:33 AM Superpredator Nov 9 2012, 04:46 PM boldchamp Nov 9 2012, 03:23 AM Superpredator Nov 8 2012, 05:16 PM boldchamp Nov 8 2012, 04:51 PM FelinePowah Nov 6 2012, 03:13 AM k9boy Nov 5 2012, 07:12 PM ^ The tiger looks far more impressive then the lion They nearly always do Only in biased, fan-based comparisons. Tigers are more robust than Tigers and are more muscular. Problem? Lions have proportionately larger chests, while tigers have more distended stomachs. The upper limbs of the lion is lb for lb more robust, while it is the same with the lower limbs of the tiger. Tends to even out. When you compare similar sized specimens of near equal weight....you will find there is little, if any difference in robusticity. But why would we do that when TIGERS ARE BIGGER?! They are STILL similar in weight, with but a 5-8% difference. And, as for a lion without his mane not looking impressive. Well....let`s see....: Looks quite impressive to me. No they're not there is NO solid proof for Tigers being only 8% heavier. Why must you use a Lion looking up & a Tiger facing sideways? There is no solid proof? I used all the data there is avoidable on the subject, to get a reliable average weight for both, and the differences in weight was between 5-8%. Is that not proof enough? And....i could have that same tiger facing sideways, if you want? Would make little difference, really. The tiger would look the same size regardless of which way it is facing.....because, well.....that doesn`t effect body size...ect perhaps to the untrained eye. Yeah..SO reliable 16 Tigers & 167 Lions. You're making the Lion look taller & bigger, use these specimens instead:



boldchamp	Nov 10 2012, 06:33 PM Post #861
Omnivore Posts: 1,028 Group: Members Member #88 Joined: Jan 15, 2012	Superpredator Nov 10 2012, 06:02 PM boldchamp Nov 10 2012, 05:55 PM Superpredator Nov 10 2012, 02:56 PM boldchamp Nov 10 2012, 12:33 AM Superpredator Nov 9 2012, 04:46 PM boldchamp Nov 9 2012, 03:23 AM Superpredator Nov 8 2012, 05:16 PM boldchamp Nov 8 2012, 04:51 PM FelinePowah Nov 6 2012, 03:13 AM k9boy Nov 5 2012, 07:12 PM ^ The tiger looks far more impressive then the lion They nearly always do Only in biased, fan-based comparisons. Tigers are more robust than Tigers and are more muscular. Problem? Lions have proportionately larger chests, while tigers have more distended stomachs. The upper limbs of the lion is lb for lb more robust, while it is the same with the lower limbs of the tiger. Tends to even out. When you compare similar sized specimens of near equal weight....you will find there is little, if any difference in robusticity. But why would we do that when TIGERS ARE BIGGER?! They are STILL similar in weight, with but a 5-8% difference. And, as for a lion without his mane not looking impressive. Well....let`s see....: Looks quite impressive to me. No they're not there is NO solid proof for Tigers being only 8% heavier. Why must you use a Lion looking up & a Tiger facing sideways? There is no solid proof? I used all the data there is avoidable on the subject, to get a reliable average weight for both, and the differences in weight was between 5-8%. Is that not proof enough? And....i could have that same tiger facing sideways, if you want? Would make little difference, really. The tiger would look the same size regardless of which way it is facing.....because, well.....that doesn`t effect body size...ect perhaps to the untrained eye. Yeah..SO reliable 16 Tigers & 167 Lions. You're making the Lion look taller & bigger, use these specimens instead: I purposely choose specimens that were similar in size. Having his head up, also, tends to have no effect upon his shoulder height and/or body mass....what-so-ever, except, of course....to the untrained eye. But...i can change the position of his head. Edited by boldchamp, Nov 10 2012, 06:35 PM.



Superpredator	Nov 10 2012, 06:36 PM Post #862
Apex Predator Posts: 5,434 Group: Members Member #59 Joined: Jan 12, 2012	boldchamp Nov 10 2012, 06:33 PM Superpredator Nov 10 2012, 06:02 PM boldchamp Nov 10 2012, 05:55 PM Superpredator Nov 10 2012, 02:56 PM boldchamp Nov 10 2012, 12:33 AM Superpredator Nov 9 2012, 04:46 PM boldchamp Nov 9 2012, 03:23 AM Superpredator Nov 8 2012, 05:16 PM boldchamp Nov 8 2012, 04:51 PM FelinePowah Nov 6 2012, 03:13 AM k9boy Nov 5 2012, 07:12 PM ^ The tiger looks far more impressive then the lion They nearly always do Only in biased, fan-based comparisons. Tigers are more robust than Tigers and are more muscular. Problem? Lions have proportionately larger chests, while tigers have more distended stomachs. The upper limbs of the lion is lb for lb more robust, while it is the same with the lower limbs of the tiger. Tends to even out. When you compare similar sized specimens of near equal weight....you will find there is little, if any difference in robusticity. But why would we do that when TIGERS ARE BIGGER?! They are STILL similar in weight, with but a 5-8% difference. And, as for a lion without his mane not looking impressive. Well....let`s see....: Looks quite impressive to me. No they're not there is NO solid proof for Tigers being only 8% heavier. Why must you use a Lion looking up & a Tiger facing sideways? There is no solid proof? I used all the data there is avoidable on the subject, to get a reliable average weight for both, and the differences in weight was between 5-8%. Is that not proof enough? And....i could have that same tiger facing sideways, if you want? Would make little difference, really. The tiger would look the same size regardless of which way it is facing.....because, well.....that doesn`t effect body size...ect perhaps to the untrained eye. Yeah..SO reliable 16 Tigers & 167 Lions. You're making the Lion look taller & bigger, use these specimens instead: I purposely choose specimens that were similar in size. Having his head up, also, tends to have no effect upon his shoulder height and/or body mass....what-so-ever, except, of course....to the untrained eye. But...i can change the position of his head. Why would you do that when Tigers are nearly 10% heavier? And head direction makes the Lion look bigger.



boldchamp	Nov 10 2012, 06:37 PM Post #863
Omnivore Posts: 1,028 Group: Members Member #88 Joined: Jan 15, 2012	And....as for only 16 tigers being used....well, that was ALL there is on the scientific data (all tigerfans complained when i used hunting data....regardless of whether it was reliable or not). I already used a kaziranga tiger. But....i could make another comparison using that tiger, as well.



boldchamp	Nov 10 2012, 06:40 PM Post #864
Omnivore Posts: 1,028 Group: Members Member #88 Joined: Jan 15, 2012	Superpredator Nov 10 2012, 06:36 PM boldchamp Nov 10 2012, 06:33 PM Superpredator Nov 10 2012, 06:02 PM boldchamp Nov 10 2012, 05:55 PM Superpredator Nov 10 2012, 02:56 PM boldchamp Nov 10 2012, 12:33 AM Superpredator Nov 9 2012, 04:46 PM boldchamp Nov 9 2012, 03:23 AM Superpredator Nov 8 2012, 05:16 PM boldchamp Nov 8 2012, 04:51 PM FelinePowah Nov 6 2012, 03:13 AM k9boy Nov 5 2012, 07:12 PM ^ The tiger looks far more impressive then the lion They nearly always do Only in biased, fan-based comparisons. Tigers are more robust than Tigers and are more muscular. Problem? Lions have proportionately larger chests, while tigers have more distended stomachs. The upper limbs of the lion is lb for lb more robust, while it is the same with the lower limbs of the tiger. Tends to even out. When you compare similar sized specimens of near equal weight....you will find there is little, if any difference in robusticity. But why would we do that when TIGERS ARE BIGGER?! They are STILL similar in weight, with but a 5-8% difference. And, as for a lion without his mane not looking impressive. Well....let`s see....: Looks quite impressive to me. No they're not there is NO solid proof for Tigers being only 8% heavier. Why must you use a Lion looking up & a Tiger facing sideways? There is no solid proof? I used all the data there is avoidable on the subject, to get a reliable average weight for both, and the differences in weight was between 5-8%. Is that not proof enough? And....i could have that same tiger facing sideways, if you want? Would make little difference, really. The tiger would look the same size regardless of which way it is facing.....because, well.....that doesn`t effect body size...ect perhaps to the untrained eye. Yeah..SO reliable 16 Tigers & 167 Lions. You're making the Lion look taller & bigger, use these specimens instead: I purposely choose specimens that were similar in size. Having his head up, also, tends to have no effect upon his shoulder height and/or body mass....what-so-ever, except, of course....to the untrained eye. But...i can change the position of his head. Why would you do that when Tigers are nearly 10% heavier? And head direction makes the Lion look bigger. I never knew that head direction affected body size.....because, i previously thought that, no matter which way the head was turned....body size remained the same. Silly me. I`ll straighten the head of the tiger, and also make another comparison with that other tiger. Tigers are UP TO 10% heavier, and only with a higher food intake. But....how is that still not similar?



Superpredator	Nov 10 2012, 06:57 PM Post #865
Apex Predator Posts: 5,434 Group: Members Member #59 Joined: Jan 12, 2012	The head makes the Lion look taller. And I still can't believe you're still spreading your "Tigers are larger because the eat more" BS.



Superpredator	Nov 10 2012, 06:58 PM Post #866
Apex Predator Posts: 5,434 Group: Members Member #59 Joined: Jan 12, 2012	boldchamp Nov 10 2012, 06:37 PM And....as for only 16 tigers being used....well, that was ALL there is on the scientific data (all tigerfans complained when i used hunting data....regardless of whether it was reliable or not). I already used a kaziranga tiger. But....i could make another comparison using that tiger, as well. Well then the average for the Tigers isn't reliable now is it?



boldchamp	Nov 10 2012, 07:39 PM Post #867
Omnivore Posts: 1,028 Group: Members Member #88 Joined: Jan 15, 2012	Superpredator Nov 10 2012, 06:57 PM The head makes the Lion look taller. And I still can't believe you're still spreading your "Tigers are larger because the eat more" BS. As i`ll continue to say....how does the position of the head affect the body size of the lion? If he raises his head, will his shoulder not still be of the same height? Such a position is only deceptive to the untrained eye. And, as Packer and other authors has shown that single lions receive more meat by hunting alone (not necessarily bigger prey, though), and that, even in populations of lions where food intake is particularly high, the daily food intake, the average being over a year`s time being 8kg, per male lion, Sunquist indicated that, at least in the case of the Chitwan tiger....they eat more food.



Superpredator	Nov 10 2012, 07:47 PM Post #868
Apex Predator Posts: 5,434 Group: Members Member #59 Joined: Jan 12, 2012	boldchamp Nov 10 2012, 07:39 PM Superpredator Nov 10 2012, 06:57 PM The head makes the Lion look taller. And I still can't believe you're still spreading your "Tigers are larger because the eat more" BS. As i`ll continue to say....how does the position of the head affect the body size of the lion? If he raises his head, will his shoulder not still be of the same height? Such a position is only deceptive to the untrained eye. And, as Packer and other authors has shown that single lions receive more meat by hunting alone (not necessarily bigger prey, though), and that, even in populations of lions where food intake is particularly high, the daily food intake, the average being over a year`s time being 8kg, per male lion, Sunquist indicated that, at least in the case of the Chitwan tiger....they eat more food. IT MAKES THE LION LOOK TALLER. Wow, because it equates to Chitwan Tigers, it equates to all Tigers?



boldchamp	Nov 10 2012, 07:51 PM Post #869
Omnivore Posts: 1,028 Group: Members Member #88 Joined: Jan 15, 2012	Superpredator Nov 10 2012, 06:58 PM boldchamp Nov 10 2012, 06:37 PM And....as for only 16 tigers being used....well, that was ALL there is on the scientific data (all tigerfans complained when i used hunting data....regardless of whether it was reliable or not). I already used a kaziranga tiger. But....i could make another comparison using that tiger, as well. Well then the average for the Tigers isn't reliable now is it? Apparently....tigers fans use that same data to indicate tigers are bigger. When i use it here, though.....it isn`t reliable? But, if you want other, reliable data.....here you are: I could show more. But....looks quite similar to lions, to me.



boldchamp	Nov 10 2012, 07:54 PM Post #870
Omnivore Posts: 1,028 Group: Members Member #88 Joined: Jan 15, 2012	Superpredator Nov 10 2012, 07:47 PM boldchamp Nov 10 2012, 07:39 PM Superpredator Nov 10 2012, 06:57 PM The head makes the Lion look taller. And I still can't believe you're still spreading your "Tigers are larger because the eat more" BS. As i`ll continue to say....how does the position of the head affect the body size of the lion? If he raises his head, will his shoulder not still be of the same height? Such a position is only deceptive to the untrained eye. And, as Packer and other authors has shown that single lions receive more meat by hunting alone (not necessarily bigger prey, though), and that, even in populations of lions where food intake is particularly high, the daily food intake, the average being over a year`s time being 8kg, per male lion, Sunquist indicated that, at least in the case of the Chitwan tiger....they eat more food. IT MAKES THE LION LOOK TALLER. Wow, because it equates to Chitwan Tigers, it equates to all Tigers? No, that doesn`t equate to all tigers. But, tigers eat alone, generally hunt medium sized prey that affords them, at least in some cases, a better meal than might be the case for the lion which, generally....has to share it`s prize. And, in my comparison, IT ONLY MAKES THE LION LOOK TALLER TO THE UNTRAINED EYE. I can use caps too. But...back to the point. Check this out: And....read my last post. Edited by boldchamp, Nov 10 2012, 07:56 PM.



2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous)

Our users say it best: "A great way to make a forums for free and it is very reliable as well. Thank you Zetaboards." Learn More · Register for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Video & Image Gallery · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
…
57
58
59
…
113