The "King" of the bears - comparison between the Polar bear and the Brown bear

[Shadow]

(12-13-2018, 06:04 PM)GuateGojira Wrote: @Shadow I think that you would prefer a table like this:

*This image is copyright of its original author

I noticed something now, when I looked your posting again, which I didn´t notice before.  But here is what I noticed and it was quite interesting and also proving how easy it is to make charts giving possible a very wrong picture about situation.

Here is attached chart, which panther posted and where is given information like Alaskan peninsula bears would be clearly heavier, than Kodiak island bears. But when comparing these charts I noticed, that information in chart posted by panther is actually based to chart posted here by you and earlier by brotherbear.... And now we get to interesting part.

In "panther" chart there are mentioned 10 Kodiak bears to get average weight to bears 6+ years. Then representing Alaskan peninsula there are only 5 specimens 9+ years!!! So all bears at least 9 years old, which is not a meaningless detail, when from this other chart we can see, that comparison group of Kodiaks are at maximum 9 years old, 2 are 6 years old, 3 are 7 years old and then 5 are 8 years old. That is how I understand that chart. Or oldest max 9 years old. 

This is very strange comparison to make it like that, when there are 5 Alaskan peninsula bears 9+ years old. If we calculate Kodiak bear 8-9 years old where we have as big (small) comparison group, what happens. Suddenly we have figures, where Kodiaks have average weight 379 kg and Alaskan peninsula bears 389 kg. So difference is 10 kg and here we have to remember again, that Alaskan peninsula bears in this group can be assumed to be older. So actually when we make this comparison in most fair possible way considering information what we can use, there is practically same average weights between these bears. We have to remember, that these bears gain weight a year by year also after age of 9 years even though skeleton is practically as big as it can be. It could be, that if there would have been 2 older Kodiaks, that their average weight had been bigger after all. 

My conclusion is, that with this information it is not possible to say which subspecies has bigger average weight. But when looking at all information, what I have seen I assume, that it is after all Kodiak bear most probably. I think like that because local officials even today say, that Kodiaks are biggest bears there and vast majority of known "monster sized" bears are Kodiaks. And there has to be reason why trophy hunters are so eager to get license to hunt especially at Kodiak islands.

I can be wrong, but with known facts about bears and looking at these charts I dare to say, that not all statistics, even when printed at books are necessary accurate. There was time, when Guinness book of records claimed, that great white shark can be 12 meters long... I have read that specific book myself. Today we know better Reply

Attached Files

Image(s)