Maximum size of prey that a single male lion or tiger can kill

[GuateGojira]

(04-16-2020, 11:39 PM)Pckts Wrote: @GuateGojira 
Did I forget this image?

*This image is copyright of its original author

What about this image?
There's no weight attached to it nor is there even a sex applied to it.

*This image is copyright of its original author

"weighing a kill as often as possible" which wasn't often at all and I've already posted where they speak about not weighing the animals and estimating the size.
And again, no notation on weights of "bulls killed by Tigers"

*This image is copyright of its original author

These are estimates since the Carcasses of course were fed on and again we don't know which were weighed and which were estimated but according to the actual study, almost all presented were estimated and not weighed outright. 

ADM/Prime and everything in between is loose to claim it's a 1000kg Gaur, since they come in many sizes.
Hence the huge range from 500-1000kg


Why don't you just get in contact with Karanth or Sunquist and ask them if they actually found a carcass killed by a Tiger and weighed it at 1000kg?
I emailed Karanth but it got shot back so I don't know if you have a better email address or not.

You say: "What about this image? There's no weight attached to it nor is there even a sex applied to it."

Dude, is this for real??? You claimed that the animals were not weighed several times, now I show you the image where IT SHOWS that the animals killed were ACTUALLY WEIGHED. The problem is not if the image have a weight or not, is the fact that you continue saying that they did not weighed the carcasses when there is an image that actually shows how they weighed even the biggest gaurs.

You say: "weighing a kill as often as possible" which wasn't often at all and I've already posted where they speak about not weighing the animals and estimating the size.And again, no notation on weights of "bulls killed by Tigers"

That is NOT what it says, READ again, it says "By weighing a kill it is often possible to figure it out how much meat the tiger ate from it". You see, you are not even reading correctly, here is the image again, read it at least two or three times:

*This image is copyright of its original author

And also you say that "which wasn't often at all", so now you are calling Dr Karanth and Dr Sunquist liars. I think that you allready reached a point were there is no other excuse from your part that the only thing that you can do is going against the reputation of these experts, and that is veeeeeery low from you part @Pckts.

You say: "These are estimates since the Carcasses of course were fed on and again we don't know which were weighed and which were estimated but according to the actual study, almost all presented were estimated and not weighed outright."

And the point is? Those were real weights and they just estimated the amount ate by the predators, like I told you, they could easely found gaurs of 900 kg in the carcasses and the rest was estimated based in the amount that a tiger can eat in 24 hours and the amount of days that the tiger was with the kill. Certainly there is no problem with that. And a gaur of 900 kg with an average stomach content will weight 1,000 kg easly. Oh yes, don't forget that those huge figures for gaurs or any big herbivore includes stomach content.

You say: "ADM/Prime and everything in between is loose to claim it's a 1000kg Gaur, since they come in many sizes. Hence the huge range from 500-1000kg"

And again, what is the point? If they found big gaurs of 900 - 1000 kg with claw marks, bite marks and a tiger near to them, it is obvious that a tiger killed them. So it is not a loose claim, they saw the carcasses, they saw the evidence, are you agains they conclutions?

You say: "Why don't you just get in contact with Karanth or Sunquist and ask them if they actually found a carcass killed by a Tiger and weighed it at 1000kg? I emailed Karanth but it got shot back so I don't know if you have a better email address or not."

Why we are going to ask something that is CLEARLY explained several times in the books and documents that they presented? This is like asking if they weighed tigers in they studies. You are been redundant in all this, it's really exhausting to have a debate with a person that constantly deny the evidence again and again and again, without showing any evidence of the contrary appart of his own opinions.

Go and ask them if you want it, you are the one that do not believe in them. I have the books from them and there are not going to publish something without a background of information. Reply