The point is that it's not for false manlyhood/tradition/fun/sport or any of that retarded shit you really eat the fish and that's what you go fishing for.
I have a problem when people kill for the sheer fun of it, I wouldn't judge a person who lives near the amazonas that kills a big ****ing (rare) snake cause it entered his house and threatened his life.
Come on now, I know you're not stupid and you know what I mean I already posted that in the Comic OT.
Killing just for the fun of it or sport or because of "tradition" is just disgusting imo.
And as a rule of thumb, I personally go by how many offspring a species throws out. So going by that killing an elephant is way worse than killing a fly. Or in this example Bear > Fish.
Love gives birth to sacrifice... which brings forth hatred... and let's you know pain!
Ideals, Religion, Freedom, Truth, Grudges, Love, Just Because
Your reasons don’t matter at all. Any trivial thing that motivates people to action will eventually breed war.
The best evidence I have seen is the "wider back jaw" for an upright posture. Other than making vague claims that it walked on all fours because it was so large, there's no other "best" evidence marker other than an really good guess that it was upright due to the wider jaw at the back.
Claims to the contrary are baseless. Even the bipedal evidence of an upgright posture are almost baseless...but it is the strongest claim, I personally believe.
Until we get a hip bone, we really won't know....there are other bones we could get but the hip bone is the very best indicator.
Last edited by dadudemon on Dec 18th, 2010 at 04:55 PM
Well, I wish I had time to run down my facts online but I don't, my info comes mostly from over 20 years of watching nature shows on Discovery, Natgeo, PBS, etc. I do watch a LOT of shows on this subject (not the fight, but animal stats)
The thread was Kodiak (or Alaskan Brown), not a Grizzly, there's a difference, and Kodiaks can reach 1500 lbs..or more.
Animal Face Off on Discovery measured a Kamchacktan Brown Bear, which is slightly smaller than a Kodiak, bite force at 1800 lbs PSI.
Ok, Gorillas do have large canines but those pictures are deceptive, the bears head is 3-4 times the size thus it's canines would be much larger.
As I've previously noted also, Gorillas do not fight with their teeth (though chimpanzees do), they use their fists.
On claws I concede that some primates may have claws though Gorillas do not ....and the Koala is a marsupial, not a primate.
__________________ There are more humans in the world than rats.
Last edited by Archaeopteryx on Dec 18th, 2010 at 05:34 PM
Most of you think the bear wins simply because it's bigger and has claws. A Kodiak's claws are deadly to humans and very threatening but a Gorilla should be a tougher nut to crack than a human. The Silverbacks 440 lbs of solid muscle and bone. Look at it's shoulders, head and neck. You would almost have to imagine the gorilla not being able to do anything to the bear to hurt it. The gorilla has the strongest arms and hands in the animal kingdom. Shouldn't that make ripping the jaws of an attacking kodiak apart something that it could and would likely do?
There used to be a show called "Animal Face-Off," where two animals would be pitted against each other, their chances "scientifically" evaluated by experts, experts in each animal, in biomechanical engineering, and in computer simulation. After 55 minutes of hearing and watching these experts do their thing, the last 5 minutes featured cgi animals, based on supposedly real data, facing-off. IIRC, the animal with the substantially superior mass (and therefore strength, as it takes muscle power to move all that mass), won.
The bear has about 3x the gorilla's mass; it's strength overall has to be proportional. Plus it does have long, rending claws. Unless a silverback pulls Kong-style takedowns (which, naturally, I really don't think gorillas are prone to do), Ursus arctos middendorffi, IMHO, wins.
Shinier than a speeding bullet.
That's what I'd like to figure out. When I was younger I read that a gorilla is 20x stronger than a man and can rip a man limb from limb. The strength of the gorilla seems disproportionate. I would like to know how strong the strongest gorilla's arms and grip would be. If the gorilla could easily rip the jaw off and/or crush the snout of an attacking bear then I'd like to factor that in rather than just say the bear wins cause it's bigger. A bear has a lot more fat than a gorilla which does not hibernate. A 400 pound human would probably be killed a 150 pound chimp that was trying to kill them despite being much larger.
Having 3x the gorillas mass doesn't immediately equal 3x as strong as the gorilla.
Much of a bear's weight is muscle. But for argument's sake, even if 1/3 of a bear's weight was fat, it would still outweigh a gorilla by 2:1. And I've heard that a bear could crush a bull's skull with one swipe.
It's certainly possible for the gorilla to win. But for now, I'm still gonna bet on Yogi.
Shinier than a speeding bullet.
I've heard that too. (the thing about the bull) Could a gorilla's skull withstand it? If it can't I can't see how it could win but I don't know how tough it is? Do you think a gorilla would use it's rending abilities to attack? Would it grab an attacking animal like a bear?
I saw this on an episode about bears in discovery. Apparently, Grizzlys aren't afraid of shit and one adult male was destroying the local population of black bears like it was nothing. They had to hunt down the grizzly and relocate it because of how destructive it was being.