|
|
Post by creature386 on Mar 19, 2016 13:41:08 GMT 5
Jade,
there is a difference between a priori and a posteriori. The former is about drawing conclusions before gathering empirical data (what you have done) and the latter about drawing conclusions from data (what Ceratodromeus is demanding from you).
|
|
|
|
Post by Ceratodromeus on Mar 19, 2016 21:39:03 GMT 5
I was not communicating with you, I also have not said that you were ignoring my evidence, I would like you to point out when I said that, and I have not said you are dismissing the evidence. The second one are clearly based on nothing, as I have not claimed the words are reliable. you clearly were trying to. "The evidence have been posted, and Ceratodromeus is good at making up things by saying that I claims Ceratodromeus is dismissing the evidence, thought I said Ceratodromeus is diminishing the facts, by saying they are basic, thought they are actually more reliable, then datas. " are those two statements not synonymous, or am i missing something because of the bit of a language barrier here? |
|
|
|
Post by jhg on Dec 1, 2016 8:43:05 GMT 5
I'm guessing the giraffe. It's a bit larger and can step on the buffalo.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2017 2:42:24 GMT 5
I can't see much that the buffalo could do here to be honest. It's much smaller than the giraffe and the reach advantage of the giraffe essentially means that the buffalo can't really get close before it is literally stomped on or kicked to death.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2018 7:50:19 GMT 5
The giraffe wins this pretty easily, like jhg says.
|
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Feb 5, 2019 19:15:45 GMT 5
I favor the buffalo. It's able to withstand these forces well, and could very well cripple a leg with 1 charge.
However, as others have said, the giraffe isn't to be underestimated. Buffalo 60/40
|
|
