|
Post by King Kodiak on Dec 28, 2020 10:20:23 GMT -5
theundertaker45: If you are looking to make a change, maybe its a good idea to add the species (or subspecies) name of the animals, but the backround looks better the simple style.
|
|
|
Post by tom on Dec 28, 2020 13:13:47 GMT -5
yeah there's a little bit of a learning curve and a little bit of trial and error to do that, but proboards has some pretty good help forums on how to do stuff like that If you're willing to put in the time to research it, that's how I did it. I'll look into it. What would you like me to replace it with? Sure, go ahead. I really don't like these old comparisons of mine anymore. Ok you'll have to tell me what you want changed and what you want it changed to? I'm assuming it's the photo on the right?
|
|
|
Post by tom on Dec 28, 2020 13:47:10 GMT -5
Ok so take a look at the front page and tell me if that's what you were looking for. As is or changes, additions or any text included?
|
|
|
Post by theundertaker45 on Dec 28, 2020 14:33:00 GMT -5
Looks great, tom, thank you!
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Dec 29, 2020 5:49:41 GMT -5
Today Kenya is home to some of the most spectacular wildlife on the planet. Back in the early Miocene this was still very much the case; as evidenced by Simbakubwa kutokaafrika. While its name translates as the "great lion of Africa" it was not, in fact, a lion at all. Rather it was a Hyainailourid, within the order of Hyaenodonts (unrelated to modern hyaenas). While the notion of it being a lion is somewhat metaphorical there is no denying that it was certainly "great". Indeed it was possibly up to 1.5 tonnes of greatness. With a massive skull filled with self-sharpening, shearing teeth and powerful jaws it was well equipped for its role as an apex predator. Living in forested habitat it was likely an effective ambush hunter. It may well have preyed upon early proboscideans and rhinoceros. The only known fossils of Simbakubwa went unnoticed for over 30 years and were kept in a collection of Hyaena remains in the Nairobi National Museum. From: WORLD OF PREHISTORIC CREATURES ( facebook group ) Lindsey Kinsella: Age of Genesis
|
|
|
Post by theundertaker45 on Dec 30, 2020 12:17:01 GMT -5
Here is a comparison using more "realistic models" of the two animals if you will; those were created by a "DeviantArt" user called "serchio25", he did a great job imo! Arctodus Simus - Ursus Spelaeus (largest possible sizes)
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Dec 30, 2020 12:32:00 GMT -5
That's very good Taker. Looks good to me.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Dec 30, 2020 13:34:39 GMT -5
Size Matters! The classic cave bear was 'the most bearish of bears' but the short-faced bear was a monster. When my favorite of favorites cannot likely win in a confrontation; I really deeply hate it. But, I do not throw myself into a radical state of denial.
|
|
|
Post by OldGreenGrolar on Dec 31, 2020 1:08:18 GMT -5
I enjoy that picture. Do we have an Artodus Simus and male polar bear comparison thread yet.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Dec 31, 2020 7:42:33 GMT -5
When we compare this ( probably ) "biggest of the big cats ever" to some of our biggest bears, it really puts things in perspective. Nicely done nocap.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Dec 31, 2020 12:49:37 GMT -5
When we compare this ( probably ) "biggest of the big cats ever" to some of our biggest bears, it really puts things in perspective. Nicely done nocap. From Kamchatka upwards, the Smilodon populator stands very little chance at averages.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Dec 31, 2020 13:05:31 GMT -5
When we compare this ( probably ) "biggest of the big cats ever" to some of our biggest bears, it really puts things in perspective. Nicely done nocap. From Kamchatka upwards, the Smilodon populator stands very little chance at averages.Hokkaido brown bear and Ussuri brown bear; pretty-much at weight-parity with Smilodon populator. ( IMO ) 50/50 for these two.
|
|
|
Post by theundertaker45 on Jan 1, 2021 15:00:13 GMT -5
Kodiak Bear - Ursus Spelaeus (model by "Prehistoric Fauna")
This would probably represent two average specimens; I've taken a closer look at Christiansen and Harris' work and the average weight for male cave bears is ~525kg based on 6 equations conducted by them (I excluded equations based on canids/felids/hyaenids and solely focused on equations based on ursids due to obvious reasons; those animal groups are only very distantly related to ursids).
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Jan 1, 2021 15:21:03 GMT -5
525 kilograms is equal to 1,157.43 pounds and equals to one very big bear. Average fully grown male Kodiak bear (9 years+) - 1077.3 pounds. Average mature male polar bear (6 years+) - 1075 pounds. ( can probably add another 100 pounds for 9+ year old males ).
|
|
|
Post by theundertaker45 on Jan 1, 2021 15:44:55 GMT -5
brobearYeah, that's very important to note. This weight figure doesn't take age classes or seasonal weight gains into account.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Jan 2, 2021 2:11:55 GMT -5
The Florida short-faced bear: 331 pounds to 661 pounds. Tremarctos floridanus - the Florida short-faced bear - the forgotten big bear.
|
|
|
Post by theundertaker45 on Jan 2, 2021 9:00:22 GMT -5
Revised version in better quality
|
|
|
Post by theundertaker45 on Jan 2, 2021 13:13:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by tom on Jan 2, 2021 16:30:55 GMT -5
The cave Bear is just a beast of a Bear. I didn't think anything could beat the Kodiak Bear in terms of bulk for his size, but I was wrong. Was cave bear a omnivore or was he more like the Polar Bear?
|
|
|
Post by theundertaker45 on Jan 2, 2021 16:45:04 GMT -5
tomA vegetarian actually; the "silverback" of all bears alongside the giant panda.
|
|