There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
--- Peter Broekhuijsen ---

  • 3 Vote(s) - 4.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Freak Felids - A Discussion of History's Largest Felines

United States tigerluver Offline
Prehistoric Feline Expert
*****
Moderators
( This post was last modified: 09-21-2015, 06:45 PM by tigerluver )

1) 220 kg or 230 kg, it does not really matter, as there are some individuals of greater weight (250+ kg) at the same limb bone lengths in collections. Christiansen 1999a, the original source of the figure, has it down as 230 kg also.

2) My mistake here, I agree with you on this point assuming equal scaling proportions with modern lions, maybe not to the height you gave, but that's of no significance here.

3) Never made any assumption like that. I just stated the issues with bone measurements. Most don't know much about the Ngandong specimens either. Even the North American short faced bear seems to have gotten the short end of the stick in recent years after the hype of the South American form. In other words, most just know about the North and South American species. That's why we're here spreading the information. The weight of P. fossilis no one has a problem with, and actually my estimate a bit greater than yours, which may due to the inclusion of tigers in the genus database.

4) In simple words, the articular surface is where bones meet. Midpoint of the condyles, etc. are not the articular end. The bottom of the distal end and top of proximal caput/femoral head. The ulna had to be differentiated as total length as a sector of the proximal side does not meet another bone, and by definition is not part of the articular region. Look at any cat skeleton:

*This image is copyright of its original author
\

There are logical connections one can make to also prove the equality between full length of proximal long bones to Christiansen and Harris' (2005) measurements. For example, if Christiansen's length were not total, the Smilodon in his work are oddly much less robust than Merriam and Stock's specimens.

Campione agrees. Finally, Christiansen uses a few specimens in his 2005 from his earlier 1999a/b works. The lengths of the specimen used are the same. That ends that.

5) You've ignored the entirety of my explanation on the bone and vK's methods and the like and just repeated yourself. I'd expect one like you to understand the examples and relationships of the bone diameters as you've measured many. You can't just pass off inconsistencies if they don't fit your viewpoint. The specimen number is very low, and even then the averages do hover around 300 kg. The bones are also more robust, and interestingly enough, the Ngandong locality bones are more robust than the Wateolang locality bones. However, I agree that the femur specimen is likely at the very top of the species range, and coincidentally it was unearthed. 

I sense an implication that vK's femur measurements were wrong. I've seen this before and this has no basis either. There are a few instances throughout the book where he emphasizes how much larger the 480 mm femur is than the rest of the cat fossils. 

I've only posted one picture here of the femur from my copy. The two pictures on yuku that you are referring to are extremely distorted, but that is not what i used. The posterior view is still sitting snug in the book, whereby the condyles are seen. I'm not shredding up the entirety of a $100 book. Diameters came out equal. Easy explanation to that is that the tiger's epicondyles are not pronounced. Even in the yuku distorted images one can trace the sides of the femur from front to back. I am certain the images are not distorted in vK's publishing, as I've already explained. I'll say it again. There are quite a few fossils of where his measurements were of obvious areas, and the photographic extrapolation was on point to the hundredths place. To me at least, it makes no sense that one select bone he'll have photographed that poorly. I'll repeat another point, the extrapolated measurements fit the measurements that are comparable to modern methods.

We can end it with this. The rejection or acceptance of the femur, like in every aspect of the human scope, comes down to preference or disgust. There was once a group that photoshopped the tables for it to read 408 mm, at least you have doubts but are not stooping to that point.  

6)
Unfortunately, you get a bit aggressive when you are questioned. My questioning is not for derogatory purposes. Rather, it's for learning. I was not even looking for numbers, just the general model. There's a limit of what models are acceptable, and if someone has derived a new one we'd like to assess it, and maybe even apply it to a broader range. Instead, we get the tribute to the mighty WaveRiders and then some more accusations. I'm sure you are knowledgeable. It'd be improper to debate the tribute points anywhere on this forum, so moving on. Only remark on this will be, knowing this is the internet, you should expect a strong amount of distrust, especially considering the unlikelihood of the situation. Write with that in mind and don't be offended if someone questions the anonymity. For the sake of the forum, you'll likely respond with another tribute, but I will not respond back to keep it to the content of interest. Also, please don't put words in another's mouth as they say. I see that can occur when posts must be that word heavy, but debating words that are not mine is futile. Finally, as the debate has run its course, ideas are being repeated. So to finish, I apologize if anything I've said to you was taken as rude or negatively, especially with the lack of tone on the internet. I respect you, disagree with you, but negativity is not the intention. Good luck in your studies.

Next post will be on Homotherium, stay tuned.
4 users Like tigerluver's post
Reply




Messages In This Thread
RE: Freak Felids - A Discussion of History's Largest Felines - tigerluver - 03-09-2015, 12:44 AM
Sabertoothed Cats - brotherbear - 06-11-2016, 11:59 AM
RE: Sabertoothed Cats - peter - 06-11-2016, 04:28 PM
Ancient Jaguar - brotherbear - 01-04-2018, 12:45 AM



Users browsing this thread:
2 Guest(s)

About Us
Go Social     Subscribe  

Welcome to WILDFACT forum, a website that focuses on sharing the joy that wildlife has on offer. We welcome all wildlife lovers to join us in sharing that joy. As a member you can share your research, knowledge and experience on animals with the community.
wildfact.com is intended to serve as an online resource for wildlife lovers of all skill levels from beginners to professionals and from all fields that belong to wildlife anyhow. Our focus area is wild animals from all over world. Content generated here will help showcase the work of wildlife experts and lovers to the world. We believe by the help of your informative article and content we will succeed to educate the world, how these beautiful animals are important to survival of all man kind.
Many thanks for visiting wildfact.com. We hope you will keep visiting wildfact regularly and will refer other members who have passion for wildlife.

Forum software by © MyBB