|
Post by allosaurusatrox on Nov 12, 2014 19:38:35 GMT 5
My votes on the leopard.
|
|
LeopJag
Member
Panthera kryptikos (cryptic, evasive panther)
Posts: 440
|
Post by LeopJag on Nov 15, 2014 6:21:03 GMT 5
A CL would whoop my ass pretty quick...
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Nov 15, 2014 9:39:12 GMT 5
Even though I am 72 kg and reasonably fit myself, I wouldn't bet on my own chances against a 23 kg cat with temperament either. Felines are physically some of the most impressive animals for their size; humans one of the least.
I think that people underestimate the CL too much here. I'd back a strong and confident man over a CL though, but not an SL.
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Nov 15, 2014 15:51:56 GMT 5
Even though I know I'd have no chance, a 70 to 80 kg human would be able to defeat the average CL which weighs roughly 20 kg.
|
|
|
Post by allosaurusatrox on Nov 18, 2014 0:09:10 GMT 5
This reminds me of this news article were someone claimed that humans evolved to punch each other, that our faces were custom built to take a punch.
I don't believe it.
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Nov 18, 2014 3:18:11 GMT 5
Me neither, cause they aren’t. Our faces are actually particularly vulnerable to punching if one thinks it through properly. They offer a nice, flat, almost vertical surface (unlike the more sloping ones in other mammals), with the soft tissue covering moderate in thickness and the underlying bones (e.g. the nasals) and the teeth rather delicate and prone to breakage. A frontal punch will hit our face almost perpendicularly and neither the shape nor the bone thickness serve to absorb the energy as well as e.g. a chimp’s would. This also means that due to the force’s angle of attack our head is terribly prone to being accellerated backwards, making us more vulnerable to concussions. Plus, our necks also seem embarrassingly un-robust compared to most animal’s (logical, after all it’s loaded vertically and thus little musculature is needed to cantilever it. btu that means there’s little musculature to oppose an anteroposterior displacement of the head).
Biomechanically speaking, we are pathetic in terms of resistance to punches in the face.
|
|
|
Post by allosaurusatrox on Nov 18, 2014 3:41:42 GMT 5
not to forget human faces are very diverse, so how is such a variable design "custom build for taking hits"? while its true that some species have build in "shock-absorbers" for interspecific fights (hollow cavities beneath rams horns, thick skin on elephant seal necks) no species devotes such a large and vulnerable area for this propose.
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Nov 21, 2014 8:46:57 GMT 5
Biomechanically speaking, we are pathetic in terms of resistance to punches in the face. Biomechanically speaking, humans are pathetic in general. When you compare an 80 kg man to an 80 kg jaguar, or a black bear or chimpanzee of similar size; you quickly realize that there is simply no comparison. Physically, we are severely outclassed in almost every department. We strive so much as a species only because of our social and intelligent nature. In a one-on-one gloves off brawl however, many of our most advantageous traits are rather useless. Even a 23 kg CL would be too much to handle for most members of our species.
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Nov 21, 2014 19:53:27 GMT 5
We’re not pathetic at all in terms of stamina and dexterity, and we could have decent strenght if we weren’t such couch potatoes. But even taking away typical human wimpyness, we’ve got very poor resilience, and of course basically non-existant weaponery.
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Nov 26, 2014 10:20:43 GMT 5
Nah getting a full on punch will knock you silly.
A swipe ain't nothing but superficial unless it's a tiger hitting you
|
|
|
Post by malikc6 on Dec 5, 2014 1:44:48 GMT 5
I don't understand why so many people chose the leopard. With well over a 100 weight advantage, this cat is screwed. Sure it has claws and a bite, but as soon as that thing jumps on me, I'm gonna slam it onto the ground and break every bone in its body. Realistically, a leopard of this size would likely run away from a human. I'd back up the leopard against some human females though, and even then, the leopard would probably be injured.
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Dec 5, 2014 22:58:40 GMT 5
I don't understand why so many people chose the leopard. With well over a 100 weight advantage, this cat is screwed. Sure it has claws and a bite, but as soon as that thing jumps on me, I'm gonna slam it onto the ground and break every bone in its body. Realistically, a leopard of this size would likely run away from a human. I'd back up the leopard against some human females though, and even then, the leopard would probably be injured. Malikc, I'd be less confident about my capabilities to "break every bone in its body". If you were to attack an aggressive and provoked 50 pound feline, chances are, you wont have any skin left on your body once the kitty gets his claws out. Humans are not evolved to take physical punishment and trauma very well. In fact, our lack of ability to deal with pain is probably one of our biggest weaknesses as a species.
|
|
|
Post by Godzillasaurus on Dec 6, 2014 20:27:10 GMT 5
An average human stands no chance with no weapons....
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Dec 6, 2014 20:28:51 GMT 5
No chance? Come on, humans are not THAT weak. For having no chance against an opponent a fraction of the own's size, one would have to be very pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by Godzillasaurus on Dec 6, 2014 20:31:30 GMT 5
And humans are, by evolutionary weaponry standards. Humans evolved a huge superiority over many other mammals based on one thing: intelligence.
Yet, we still lack true adaptive killing weapons, as we have slowly grown to become far too dependent on man-made weapons (which were derived from our intelligence). On the other end, the canines of the clouded leopard are extremely long and the creature is, still, much better adapted for killing
|
|