|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Mar 10, 2014 9:39:38 GMT 5
I read the debate on CF between Taipan and Black Ice, and dare I say it, I was siding with Taipan throughout most of the argument.  www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/artikkel.php?artid=586948An Eagle killed and ate a Norwegian fishing cat, but not after the Cat gave it a brutal fight. If a significantly smaller Cat can severely injure a large Eagle, then it is certainly not unreasonable to think that a Cougar could maul a Deinonychus. |
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Mar 10, 2014 10:04:35 GMT 5
I read the debate on CF between Taipan and Black Ice, and dare I say it, I was siding with Taipan throughout most of the argument. www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/artikkel.php?artid=586948An Eagle killed and ate a Norwegian fishing cat, but not after the Cat gave it a brutal fight. If a significantly smaller Cat can severely injure a large Eagle, then it is certainly not unreasonable to think that a Cougar could maul a Deinonychus. Vodmeister that was a male golden eagle that killed the cat and still had the strength to eat half of it. Male golden don't pass 10lbs. Norwegian forest cat males can reach 20+lbs. That cat was no kitten. It was either an average to big male or a equal sized female. Please tell me where you got the cat was significantly smaller from? If anything that account says Deinonychus wins since a lesser equipped ungainly on the ground eagle killed a cat in a terrestrial fight. Sigh if only people would just read what I translated (I know norwegian or hell translate it their self if they don't trust me) they would see that that was a MALE golden eagle that killed a cat most likely bigger than it seeing as a kitten as taipan stupidly called it wouldn't be able to adequately defend itself. A little light reading on golden eagles would also tell you males are smaller than female and rarely if ever top 10lbs if even that. |
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Mar 10, 2014 11:30:17 GMT 5
Black Ice, a picture is worth a thousand words, and one can easily tell from that picture that the Cat was nowhere near 20 pounds. It's head is tiny, and despite being closer to the camera, it barely looks any bigger that the guy's blue shoe. Likewise, even if the cat's torso was "half eaten", the cat's head was unscratched yet it looks pygmy.
I have seen plenty of 8-10 kg housecats in my life, but I can guarantee you just from that picture - that cat is nowhere near 20 pounds.
Also, just because the article says that the cat was fully grown doesn't necessarily make it true. According to Last Big Cats by Erwin A. Bauer, Dale the 400 pound Siberian tiger killed a Brown bear double his own weight. Later, it was confirmed via photographic evidence that the Bear Dale killed was actually a 441 lbs female.
Pictorial evidence > Written claim, and in this case, that cat was undeniably smaller than the Eagle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Mar 10, 2014 11:35:05 GMT 5
|
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Mar 10, 2014 15:28:13 GMT 5
Black Ice, a picture is worth a thousand words, and one can easily tell from that picture that the Cat was nowhere near 20 pounds. It's head is tiny, and despite being closer to the camera, it barely looks any bigger that the guy's blue shoe. Likewise, even if the cat's torso was "half eaten", the cat's head was unscratched yet it looks pygmy. I have seen plenty of 8-10 kg housecats in my life, but I can guarantee you just from that picture - that cat is nowhere near 20 pounds. Also, just because the article says that the cat was fully grown doesn't necessarily make it true. According to Last Big Cats by Erwin A. Bauer, Dale the 400 pound Siberian tiger killed a Brown bear double his own weight. Later, it was confirmed via photographic evidence that the Bear Dale killed was actually a 441 lbs female. Pictorial evidence > Written claim, and in this case, that cat was undeniably smaller than the Eagle. Sigh what? You're going by head size? So how are cougar and cheetah so big? And yes pictures are worth a thousand words so I guess if I show a pic of a eagle next to a dead cougar with no written document at all then the eagles killed it by your logic? You cant deny it cause its more important than words huh? By this why do you and other people post written evidence of animals killing stuff instead of just taking pictures huh? Please spare me your excuses. The cat had to be at least as big as an 8-10lb golden eagle. Also if you pay attentiin the cats basically perpendicular to the camera and away from the camera so if course it looks smaller than it actually is.You're acting as if those people don't know a grown ass cat from a baby. If it were a baby they would have said it. What was that you were saying about picture > written evidence? That cat was at least as big as the eagle whether you want to accept it or not is not my problem. You can cherry pic when and where you want to accept writing with a picture all you & Taipan want. |
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Mar 10, 2014 15:35:26 GMT 5
Two things that this destroys in your earlier post. 1. As I said you went by head size which was stupid. Look how tiny that cats head is compared to its body.  Reminds me of a cougars head 2. That cat isn't said to be a kitten nor was there anything wrong with it during the fight. And the eagle won and proceeded to sit and eat half of it before getting saved. That cat was no baby. It was an adult of at least equal size (8-10lbs or 7 at the least). Baby cats cant adewuately defend themself because eagle are known to kill baby kittens all the time. You just basically agreed with me lol Fun fact - Male norwegian man have huge feet. Normally wearing 13s and bigger shoes. And the guy in the pic said that he owns several cats. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2014 21:09:40 GMT 5
Deinonychus wins this with ease. It has a much bigger head and it can literally fit the cougar's head inside it's mouth. I initially thought that the cougar wins until I saw skull comparisons on Carnivoraforum.
Though, if we were using a 100 kg (or more) cougar, then I would admit that the raptor doesn't have much of a chance against the cat.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Mar 10, 2014 22:06:41 GMT 5
Black Ice, a picture is worth a thousand words, and one can easily tell from that picture that the Cat was nowhere near 20 pounds. It's head is tiny, and despite being closer to the camera, it barely looks any bigger that the guy's blue shoe. Likewise, even if the cat's torso was "half eaten", the cat's head was unscratched yet it looks pygmy. I have seen plenty of 8-10 kg housecats in my life, but I can guarantee you just from that picture - that cat is nowhere near 20 pounds. Also, just because the article says that the cat was fully grown doesn't necessarily make it true. According to Last Big Cats by Erwin A. Bauer, Dale the 400 pound Siberian tiger killed a Brown bear double his own weight. Later, it was confirmed via photographic evidence that the Bear Dale killed was actually a 441 lbs female. Pictorial evidence > Written claim, and in this case, that cat was undeniably smaller than the Eagle. Sigh what? You're going by head size? So how are cougar and cheetah so big? No, I am not only going by headsize, but also by body size. I am quite good at judging the size of felines based on scaled pictures alone, see Tiger vs Lion. That cat is nowhere near 20 pounds or 4 feet long, I don't think you fully understand how big that is. Seriously Runic?  The picture in this case is worth more than the words of the author because; 1. We know that the cat was killed by the eagle. The picture however, tells us more about the size of the animal than anyone's word ever will. 2. We understand that an adult forest cat is 14.5 inches tall and 48 inches long, on average. 3. That cat in your picture is nowhere near that size. I owned a housecat which was bigger than the cat in that image, and he only weighed 4 kg (8.8 lbs). The cat is also closer to the picture than the eagle and the two men are, which means that it probably looks proportionally bigger than them. Why would Erwin A. Bauer claim that the Brown Bear killed by Dale was an 800 pound male, when it was really only a 441 pound female? Because some accounts just sound better when they are "bigger", so to speak. When judging the size of an animal, yes. I don't need to accept it, the size of the kitten in the picture says it all. Sure, whatever dude. |
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Mar 10, 2014 22:10:47 GMT 5
|
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Mar 10, 2014 22:12:31 GMT 5
|
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Mar 10, 2014 22:17:22 GMT 5
I am quite good at judging sizes as well cept without the bias, even if this cat was smaller as you imply. Eagles have a known track record of killing cats and small dogs quite frequently. To #1  Ya huh XD sure it does. to #2 Golden eagle males may average around 3.6 kg (7.9 lb) and females around 5.1 kg (11 lb). Golden Eagle profile that I made, as you see I was being generous by saying the male eagle could have been bigger. Your case doesn't hold unless that cat weighed less than 7 pounds. To #3 Forgive me if I don't take your word seriously when it comes to cats. Ive seen cats that weigh 10lbs and look like midgets. Still bigger tha the male eagle! Why would I post a pic of a eagle next to a dead cougar and say the former killed the latter? Completely useless point on your part. Maybe Erwin was stupid? The article mentioned nothing about the cat being a kitten lol normally when there's something that crucial they don't leave it out. That bear paw must be 20ft high then Lol you want it to be a kitten. Regardless the pictures I've shown above should sate your "picture" only > written record with it fetish right? |
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Mar 10, 2014 22:30:10 GMT 5
 Compared to a woman which is smaller than a male. Do note none of this cat was eaten so it will not look smaller than it originally was. And no stop twisting my words. I merely said the average weight for both male and female of the cat was greater than 7.9lbs the average weight of a golden eagle male here that killed the cat. Now we go to this,  Lets reread the article shall we? 2 things to note. #1. "Kitten" was never used, but cat. Pointing to either a adult male or female. #2. Half eaten carcasses  Do you think that carcass has as much size and mass as it did before it was eaten? If you do then I need whatever you're smoking buddy. Look closely at that cat and you can even see the bone by its inner thigh |
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Mar 10, 2014 22:51:35 GMT 5
Runic, even if you were to Photoshop the half-eaten stomach of the cat back into this picture; It would still look far smaller than the cat in this picture.   |
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Mar 10, 2014 23:02:30 GMT 5
Even if this was the case, so what? Can a Deinonychus ambush a Cougar from above? No. That picture was taken by a hunter who wanted to deceive. This picture on the other hand, was a casual picture who's purpose was to show the dead carcass rather than deceive us upon the cat's size. Seriously man? You are misinterpreting me. You can't tell from one picture if an animal killed another animal, or if it was scavenged. However, you can tell the size difference. And maybe the Norwegians who wrote that article claiming that the forest cat was a fully grown adult were also stupid? You mean like how Erwin "crucially" didn't leave out the fact that the 800 pound male Bear was actually a 441 pound female? XD Casual picture vs deliberate deceiving picture from a Bear, maybe even a potential Photoshop. Really? The trick used by that hunter was a very simple yet well know spoof. He placed the paw of the bear significantly closer to the camera than his own body, making it seem enormous. Ironically though, in your picture the cat was closer to the camera than the men. So in real life, the cat must be proportionally even smaller! When judging the size of an animal, yes. |
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Mar 11, 2014 0:06:11 GMT 5
Yeah, I don't know how far cat-bird of prey interactions are going to take the arguments presented here.
|
|
