|
Post by King Kodiak on Dec 15, 2020 17:58:21 GMT -5
You did good putting that back how it was.
Well, it sounds more convincing to you because you love felines, but he really did not mention Africanum.
|
|
|
Post by tom on Dec 15, 2020 17:59:01 GMT -5
Reply #37: Excellent answer cheetah. Speculation and that's fine as that is all we really have to go on in this case. I guess we could get a prehistoric Cat expert and a prehistoric Bear expert together and let them have it out, but that probably won't happen. I guess we could draw some conclusions to present time large cats and Bears a come up with a hypothesis as to what likely happened millions of years ago, but that to would be pure speculation.
So Cheetah and Kodiak are we all in agreement that this argument or whatever you want to call it is pure speculation?
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Dec 15, 2020 18:03:33 GMT -5
As far as the interactions of animals back in prehistoric times, yes of course, all speculation, never denied that.
But what is not speculation is the fact the the larger carnivores will always dominate the smaller ones. And this has been studied and proven by studying the interactions of carnivores in modern times. So we have to go by that. Africanum was double or even triple the size of Kabir for god's sake. And a kleptoparasite. Basic cat behavior and basic bear behavior, the bears have always displaced cats from their food. Same as the short faced bears did with the Sabertooths.
|
|
|
Post by tom on Dec 15, 2020 18:11:12 GMT -5
Using modern day species is really the only logic decision maker to give any kind of opinion on this. You can study what has been found in fossil remains and build some kind of morphology of what these animals might be capable of, but it's not fool proof. Common logic does state that size is a huge advantage if both species are adept at fighting. Speed and agility could also be an advantage. But for all intense and purposes we can only speculate in this case..... So be it.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Dec 15, 2020 18:17:18 GMT -5
Size is the absolute main factor between 2 carnivores. Then comes all the other advantages/disadvantages.
In the animal world, relative body size of the participants is overwhelmingly important.
domainofthebears.proboards.com/post/45690/thread
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2020 18:18:26 GMT -5
You did good putting that back how it was.
Well, it sounds more convincing to you because you love felines, but he really did not mention Africanum. I do like felines more than ursids (I do not have any hate on bears,I like them too).I found more convincing because it is from an expert rather than a wikipedia user. He did not mention africanum but he did say "any predator".I already proved that they coexisted at the same time and habitat.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Dec 15, 2020 18:21:06 GMT -5
Once again, you "proved" it to yourself, not me or anybody else here for that matter. Guess what? I am still saying that Africanum dominated your feline, how about that? See? You haven't proved crap.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2020 18:21:20 GMT -5
Reply #37: Excellent answer cheetah. Speculation and that's fine as that is all we really have to go on in this case. I guess we could get a prehistoric Cat expert and a prehistoric Bear expert together and let them have it out, but that probably won't happen. I guess we could draw some conclusions to present time large cats and Bears a come up with a hypothesis as to what likely happened millions of years ago, but that to would be pure speculation. So Cheetah and Kodiak are we all in agreement that this argument or whatever you want to call it is pure speculation? "Excellent answer cheetah" Thank you Yes i agree that this is pure speculation but the speculation is from an expert rather than wiki user favours the kabir.This said it is completely reasonable to favour the africanum and I respect people's opinions which favour the africanum.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2020 18:22:08 GMT -5
Once again, you "proved" it to yourself, not me or anybody else here for that matter. Guess what? I am still saying that Africanum dominated your feline, how about that? See? You haven't proved crap. NO,you misunderstood.I proved that they both lived in the same time at the same habitat.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Dec 15, 2020 18:23:09 GMT -5
Once again, you "proved" it to yourself, not me or anybody else here for that matter. Guess what? I am still saying that Africanum dominated your feline, how about that? See? You haven't proved crap. NO,you misunderstood.I proved that they both lived in the same time at the same habitat. You didn't have to prove that though, that is known, we already knew that.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Dec 15, 2020 19:05:57 GMT -5
Check this out guys:
Professor Stephen Wroe Professor Zoology - School of Environmental and Rural Science
I am Director of the Function, Evolution & Anatomy Research (FEAR) Lab - a multidisciplinary team that includes collaborators from the University of Newcastle and University of New South Wales as well as the University of New England. Understanding how animals (living and extinct) function and how this shapes and constrains their evolution is our mission. We use 3D models, typically based on CT scans, to answer a wide range of questions in fields spanning from palaeontology and zoology to physical anthropology, as well as biomedicine.
Qualifications
AwardsARC Discovery Outstanding Researcher Award Fellow 2014-2016ARC QEII Research Fellow Univ. NSW 2006-2010U2000 Postdoctoral Fellow Univ. Sydney 2000-2005
www.une.edu.au/staff-profiles/ers/swroe
www.google.com/amp/s/www.researchgate.net/profile/Stephen_Wroe/amp
Now lets take a look at what Mr Wroe said:
Ancient bear had the strongest bite By Ella Davies Reporter, BBC Nature
The largest bear that ever lived also had the strongest bite of any land mammal, say scientists. Agriotherium africanum was a giant short-faced bear that became extinct five million years ago. Reconstructions of the carnivore's skull revealed that it was well adapted to resist the forces involved in eating large prey. By comparing the skulls of several species, scientists also found polar bears to have surprisingly weak bites. Continue reading the main story “ Start Quote Our analyses show that it had the most powerful bite of any known terrestrial mammal” Dr Stephen Rowe University of New South Wales, Australia The findings were published in the Journal of Zoology. Dr Stephen Wroe from the University of New South Wales, Australia, and his team used CT scanners to create 3-D images of bear skulls. They scanned six species, ranging from a giant panda to a reconstructed fossil of A. africanum. Using the computer generated models created by student Chris Oldfield, the researchers investigated how the skulls stood up to the forces that mimicked killing and feeding behaviours. "Our analyses show that Agriotherium africanum had an enormously powerful bite - considerably greater than for the largest of living big cats, or any living bear," said Dr Wroe. The extinct bear exerted the highest bite force with its large canine teeth. Of all the bears the team examined, its model showed the least strain through the skull when the researchers simulated the forces of biting an item of prey. "Our analyses show that it had the most powerful bite of any known terrestrial mammal determined thus far," Dr Wroe told BBC Nature.
A comparison in skull stress for bears biting with their canines (a) A. africanum, (b) Asian bear, (c) black bear, (d) brown bear, (e) giant panda, (f) polar bear and (g) polar bear. Pink shows an area of high strain, while dark blue areas show no strain. Results for another short-faced bear, the giant panda, were also notable; the animal's skull appeared to be well adapted to high levels of stress. This might seem surprising for an animal with a diet strictly limited to plant material, but Dr Wroe pointed out that the panda had a large "grinding area" to chew through tough stalks of bamboo. In comparison, A. africanum had the smallest grinding area of the bears analysed. 'Power to kill'
The researcher said that A. africanum may have been a "hypercarnivore" with an unparalleled level of meat in its diet for a bear. "There has been considerable debate over the diet of A. africanum and other short-faced bears. Some have argued that these bears were more carnivorous than most living bears," said Dr Wroe. "There can be no doubt that this beast had the power to kill almost anything it could get a hold of - it could also have chased any other predators off their kills; hence it could also have been a very effective scavenger." "Its skull was well adapted to resist the forces that would have been generated under such extreme loads."
Fat-sucker The study also revealed that the polar bear was a surprisingly "poor performer". "It has a really surprisingly weak bite for its size - arguably the weakest among living bears," Dr Wroe told BBC Nature. He pointed out that these huge carnivores tended to target relatively "easy-to-kill", blubbery prey, such as seals. "It might be more correctly categorised as a specialised 'fat-sucker' than a real meat eater," he said. The skull comparisons revealed that the polar bear had much shorter blade-like teeth for ripping flesh than the supersized A. africanum. These extinct giants lived in Africa at the end of the Miocene epoch and into the Pleistocene - five million years ago - and measured up to 2.7m in length. ( 8 feet 10.5 inches ).
domainofthebears.proboards.com/post/2394/thread
Quote:
"There can be no doubt that this beast had the power to kill almost anything it could get a hold of - it could also have chased any other predators off their kills"
|
|
|
Post by OldGreenGrolar on Dec 15, 2020 19:10:45 GMT -5
I have seen this article before but it is good to have a memory refresh. The Agrioterium has the strongest jaws of all bears while the polar bear has the best slicing bite for cutting thick hide of seals, walruses, and beluga whales.
Furthermore, it is not unusual for a larger predator to usurp the kills of a smaller one.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Dec 15, 2020 19:11:39 GMT -5
Quote from the expert Dr Stephen Wroe:
"There can be no doubt that this beast had the power to kill almost anything it could get a hold of - it could also have chased any other predators off their kills"
And this here is an expert talking. Now you know where Wiki took that info from.
Conclusion: If Africanum ever got a hold of a Kabir, it would have displaced him of its food, if Kabir decided to defend, it would had been over. The feline stands zero chance vs a bear double or even triple his size, not to mention the bite force.
|
|
|
Post by OldGreenGrolar on Dec 15, 2020 19:14:29 GMT -5
I would like to add that killing larger prey doesn’t necessarily make an animal stronger. The leopard kills much smaller prey than the sloth bear yet the latter usurps prey from the former.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Dec 15, 2020 19:19:36 GMT -5
Ok so, with this last report, i think i have pretty much challenged Cheetah's Mr Anton Source. Why? Because Mr Anton said "Kabir dominated all other predators in his habitat" so Cheetah claims "all predators!", and that includes Africanum"
Well, now my expert Dr Stephen Wroe said this:
"There can be no doubt that this beast had the power to kill almost anything it could get a hold of - it could also have chased any other predators off their kills"
Quote: "any other predators"
Well, this means the Kabir. Same logic that Cheetah uses.
As we can see, one expert says one thing, and another says another. Thus...we are equal.
Africanum wins 8/9 out of 10 times. Its more than double the weight of Kabir.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Dec 15, 2020 19:55:28 GMT -5
Quote: Sabertooth Expert Mauricio Anton says that nothing would have stood in the amphimachirodus's way. Amphimachairodus giganteus - 250 kg or 550 pounds ( the size of a large Bengal tiger ). Agriotherium africanum - from 1300 to 2000 pounds. ( larger than a typical Kodiak bear ). The bear is easily double the weight of the big cat. There were huge elephants, rhinoceros, and hippopotamus in Pleistocene Africa. To say, "nothing would have stood in Amphimachirodus's way" ..... because there are certain beasts that the cat would detour around; such as a giant carnivorous bear. Let's not forget; this bear had stronger jaws than any big cat ever.
|
|
|
Post by OldGreenGrolar on Dec 15, 2020 19:59:13 GMT -5
The largest African Agrioterium is actually heavier than even Stan the polar bear who is 1760 pounds. In conclusion, it is actually larger than the polar bear too.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Dec 15, 2020 20:02:45 GMT -5
Yeah, that is another species from North Africa. But we were really talking about the Amphimachairodus kabir, 150-350 kg of weight, its a little larger than giganteus, it reached 350 kg, still too small to even challenge Africanum:
prehistoric-fauna.com/Machairodus-kabir
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Dec 15, 2020 20:13:10 GMT -5
350 kg = 772 pounds ( still roughly half the weight of Agriotherium ).
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Dec 15, 2020 20:24:35 GMT -5
Yes, and professor of zoology and expert in paleontology Dr Stephen Wroe said this about Africanum:
"There can be no doubt that this beast had the power to kill almost anything it could get a hold of - it could also have chased any other predators off their kills"
Now, considering the size of both animals, and the basic cat behavior and basic bear behavior, which expert do you think is right?
|
|