Persian Leopard (Panthera pardus saxicolor)

[AndresVida]

@Pckts 

Here you're just twisting words to this point or simply putting in my mouth words I've never ever said which is no offense but a bit of hilarious from an experienced poster (way more experienced) than me on animal forum community. 

(02-08-2022, 11:24 PM)Pckts Wrote: You may not be aware but again this Leopard is now claimed to be 115kg again.
And in no way does it compare to a 115kg Jaguar. 

This is a very good bruh moment 
First of all, why are you changing randomly topic switching from the leooard being 95 kg to some random claims of 115 kg? 
And why are you mentioning the fact that this leopard is now again being estimated to be 115 kg to ME who I'm the one that never claimed nor believed it to be of that size but 20 kg lighter?  

When did I ever estimate the leopard to be 115 kg? Show me, because I could take you 100+ Screenshots when I've been only saying 95 kg, not even one time 115 kg. 

I'm mentioning it to be around 95 kg since two days, not even 1 single time I've ever estimated it to be 115 kg. 
Why are you changing topic switching to 115 kg? You're aware that I'm more than capable to prove it is 95 kg so you decide to change topic? Not good. 

Or maybe you confused me with Luipaard that said "95/115 kg" because he does still believe in that size? 
Fine. 
You mistook me for him, because I've never believed in the 115 kg weight as I'm also one of the few that keep mentioning that in Carnivora how that leopard lacks the bauplan and frame size to attain such huge weight on an empty stomach. 

FYI, other proof I'm never claiming that Tom to be 115 kg :

*This image is copyright of its original author

So do not insinuate the estimates or claims made by others, keep your concentration focused on our messages and on our conversation which aims to prove that the weight of 95 kg is reliable. 
I do not want to hear 115 kg mentioned one more time when you talk to me about that single persian male, as I've never mentioned it and you pulled it out at random. 
We are talking about 95 kg. Is that clear?

I don't wanna sound aggressive nor salty but tbh I enormously hate when people that are talking to me either put in my mouth estimates I've never said nor believed such as that the leopard is 115 kg, making the discussion longer than it should have been with me who has to repeat again the same points. 
I hope you get this don't you? 

Now, talking about the alleged 95 kg male, you likely insist on saying how that animal doesn't look at all to be 90+ kgs from that perspective angle, whereas on the size comparisons thread I've compared a 94 kg Jaguar to him that was lying next to people in a similar distance and that has shown they are perfectly of the same exact size. 

Now, you posted pictures of 105-110+ kg Jaguars but that's because you wrongly thought I was claiming the leopard to be in the 110+ kg benchmark. Thing I wasn't, as I've CLEARLY stated it by mentioning that I compared it to a 94 kg jaguar.

So I don't even know what made you believe that I like was stating "oh that leopard is 115 kg I've compared it to a jaguar and it looks 115 kg". Again, no. Don't ever mention 115 kg. 

My original comparison was made to this male here, sadly ran over by a truck, that weighed 94 kgs

*This image is copyright of its original author

Compare it to the 95 kg Persian in a similar position, close to humans. 

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

That DOES compare. The jaguar ain't dwarfing the cat as it would with a 70 kg leopard. Anyone with eyes and the capability of comparing sizes or at least some additional education will confirm that.
Because both cats are in a similar position. Of course if the leopard is stretched on the table on a flattering angle it will look smaller in frame. Same would with a jaguar

Now, let's go on with the comparison by comparing Jaguars of a similar size to this leopard. 

Here Karol female, almost 92 kgs 

*This image is copyright of its original author

Compared to the leopard. 

*This image is copyright of its original author

They are comparable

Now 95 kg teorema the beast, on this angle with a man next to her. 

*This image is copyright of its original author

Compared to the leopard

*This image is copyright of its original author

They are comparable

Now let's go to a larger jaguar, which is 100 kg empty and is theoretically 5 kg larger than the leopard, which isn't a huge difference, they would almost look identical in size. 
This is the image with the legs and feet of the man standing close to it (I marked the feet birders so you can see them easier) 

*This image is copyright of its original author

Compared to the leopard. 

*This image is copyright of its original author

They ARE comparable. 

Now regarding who believes it or who doesn't. 

Here the official persian leopard project page, made up by several researchers and vets that confirms the weight. 

*This image is copyright of its original author

Here Mohammad Farhadinia, debunking the idea of the 115 kg leopard and saying the original report was 95 kg. 

*This image is copyright of its original author

Here is Kaveh Hatami who also works for Persian leopards conservation also confirming that weight

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

you have the vets that were present there who confirm that after weighing the cat of course 


I think @Luipaard has the voice message of the vets that said the leopard weighed about 95 kg after a day or two, meaning that the wrong claim of 115 kg could have been also the result of the leopard gorging on a bait for the vets to sedate and capture it. But that's just speculating. 

So now? Do you have again any doubts regarding the leopard to be around 95 kg? I guess yes, years pass but you're so solid to your own idea despite all the massive evidence telling you're wrong in doubting that (vets and researchers of the project confirming the weight for you is dubious, yet you trust some visual estimates of a leopard being at least 70 kg whereas it wasn't even weighed? If yes, you're being biased to the whole level of Carnivora fanboys to this point) but so I can't do anything to convince you more than this.
 
Although you can't get a better evidence than this and that anyone who is educated in size comparisons can see how the leopard compared to the other 91-95 kg Jaguars. So either the comparison of who believes in it and who doesn't is just "you vs everyone" well, I can't do much if you can't accept that. 
Fact is that the leopard DOES weigh 95 kg. End of story. Nothing dubious.
If you're ever about to talk about that persian male and have to mention that its weight is dubious, specify that it is dubious just for you. Because you're the only one doubting it and all the other evidence tells you it's reliable. 

Even @Balam told me it's likely to be real when I used the 90+ kg Jaguar comparisons. Messages of today. 

*This image is copyright of its original author

And for your information you do know that Balam is not someone who does overestimates regarding cats, rather, she's very cautious and is sometimes even skeptical when she's told the weights of very heavy leopards that approach the 90-100 kg mark, to not count the numerous times she dealed with unreliable records on Carnivora. 

So even she's telling you she finds it reliable, you're the black sheep of the white herd. Aka you're the only one who is doubting it. 
Time to put an end to this, because it's becoming an annoying debate, this of the 95 kg male being so obsessively dubious for you. 
You should rather be impressed that in recent times another 90+ kg male not far from 100 kg was recorded, as Iranian leopards are like only 550-800 similar to Siberian tigers in numbers (and therefore endangered) but still capable of producing very large specimens close to the 100 kg benchmark. 

Not even 1 time I've claimed it to be 115 kg, as it lacks totally the frame to be that heavy on an empty stomach. Isn't that also what you think? Then we totally agree

So at this point I'll let you believe the leopard to not be 95 kg in peace. I've said what I said, this conversation is over. 

(02-08-2022, 11:24 PM)Pckts Wrote: There is a big difference between showing Mvumba at 85kg compared to this male right? Visual or not, Mvumba looks like a much smaller cat and in fact, he is. He's 55 lbs smaller than Brutus in each capture.

Again this part makes no sense and is totally off because you're mentioning that the leooard being 85 kg is much smaller than a 110-120 kg jaguar, which is true. 
But what is inaccurate about this claim? It's that you're using that to disprove the fact persian leopard is the same size as a 110-120 kg Jaguar because again you popped out this 115 kg thing from nowhere as I was never claiming it to be 115 kg. For God's sake. 

Why did I compare 85 kg Mvumba to the persian? To show you that not all leopards need to look large to weigh a lot. And they look exalcty of the same size, the persian is a little stockier. And guess how much it weighed? 95 kg! As it's perfectly comparable to 85 kg. Again, you're still assuming I'm claiming the leopard to be 115 kg. Which I'm not!! You look like you're struggling in this debate so that you randomly change topic or twist words, mentioning things that were never mentioned like the leopard being 115 kg. Again, you mistook me for Luipaard. 

(02-08-2022, 11:32 PM)Pckts Wrote: If your claim is that Persians can get to 100kg but it's extremely rare, that's fine, no one is debating that

Lastly, This part is perfectly correct. You have perfectly summarized what I thought by briefly summarizing my claim in a few words. Totally right and fine. Isn't it? 
Perfecto.

(02-08-2022, 11:32 PM)Pckts Wrote: Not to mention one of the cats mentioned is already considered smaller than M3 which I didn't even know at the time when I said he was more impressive.

Source that one of those cats that I mentioned is considered smaller whereas both are unknown males with only a single footage for both? Share me evidence of an expert saying in a message that one of those giant males I've posted is considered to be smaller of again M3 that is estimated to be 70 kg as a lowest estimate, show me physical evidence of someone claiming that male to be smaller than 70+++ kg M3. Otherwise it's just a claim based on thin air that you could have invented in that moment when you were replying to me. And still, "thought" to be smaller is just a visual estimate and most of visual estimates are off, like you claiming that leopard to look normal whereas there's sheer evidence of it being 95 kg.


"full belly, it's likely that Mvumba weighed less at about 70-75 kg" 

Another claim based on thin air? Before you estimate Vin Diesel to be full belly in images in his prime where he looks massive (but you prefer showing pictures of him past his prime, don't you?) then you even doubt Mvumba weight whereas the original source doesn't share any evidence of the leopard being gorged? Looks like that when a huge 80+ kg leopard pops out you immediately mention that it was likely gorged, although there's no evidence for it and you're just guess estimating it. 

(02-08-2022, 11:32 PM)Pckts Wrote: But if your claim is that those two cats you showed are no doubt 90-100kg's based off a single fleeting image, that's a very different debate.

But that ruined the whole thing again. When did I ever say that those males are 100% 90-100+ kg and that everyone has to believe me? From what I see, I have repeated several times that it is only my estimate and my opinion, not a fact.

Sometimes I think that I should mark my "in my opinion" or simply my "IMO" in bold letters or am I wrong? Because it seems like people really either can't see them or maybe there's a bug on my phone that makes me see that I wrote it when I didn't actually write it.

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

Am I the only one who is seeing them?
The next time I guess I'll put a 4k HD giant image with the letters " IN MY OPINION" so that no-one misread again. 
Joking aside, I'm obviously not the only one who considers these specimens to be freak specimens, ironically you are the first of many (and no I don't ask for opinions from leopard fans, I do it to people who are unbiased like some people, sometimes researchers, Mammalian users or other animal forums) to say that they are nothing special to you. But still, you said FOR YOU.
So this is also your single opinion so we're just talking about estimates.

But again, you say I can't properly estimate the size of a leopard based on no reference nor scaling. 

^That's totally true and I do 100% agree with you on this, but as I've always said that's just my opinion (approved by a lot-, but it's just speculating so I don't even consider how many people agree how those are no ordinary common leopards) and I've never said that as a sheer fact. This is just opinions vs opinions right? 

Now, what's interesting is how you changed the way to approach my personal estimate of these males. 

First you say they look nothing exceptional for you, and pull out that male that was estimated to be again at least 70 kg, not "around 70 kg" or in the "70 kg range" as you just wrote in your last message today modifying the words so that it would look more in your favor. 
Because no, around 70 kg or in the 70 kg range means that it was close to the 70 kg benchmark.,whereas at least 70 kg means that 70 kg is the lowest estimate and that it can be even higher. They are not the same things.
People say at least when they wanna make an estimate that is undoubtedly nothing less than that weigh (in this case, 70 kg) but that it can be even larger. 

So again, this male was never weighed and you can't use that guess lowest estimate for the animal as a proof that those males fall in the same mark as it. Because that male wasn't weighed. And again if you're using that 70 kg (lowest) estimate as a proof then you can't deny the claims of Vin Diesel to be 80-90+ kg, rather than posting images of him when he's far past his prime and claiming him to be gorged in the images where he looks massive and chocky (which is exactly when they allegedly weighed him because they removed its collar but again I'm not stating this is verified, it's not.) thing you have no evidence for it to be. 

Back to the original topic, you said I can't reliably estimate them to be that size. 

Of course I can't and I do not spread that as sheer fact, as I repeated billions of times it's just my opinion. And I've already told you I perfectly agree on this. Don't we agree on this?

But as much as my opinion of them to be well over 90 kg is just my opinion that can't be confirmed, so is yours of them not being impressive. 

So at the end we are just "punto e a capo" As we say in Italian, which means "we always end to the same point". 
That it's just opinions. I still think is pretty of a fact that the males look too impressive to be average sized, but oh well. Again that's just my opinion. Reply