Comparing Cats: A Discussion of Similarities & Differences

[Pckts]

Quote:Both actually. Higher weights have been chosen when an individual was weighed more than once. And indeed an outlier was added twice. Also please provide evidence that both 95kg and 115kg figures have been used instead of just one. Because you've shown yourself that 91kg is the maximum in the table (because they did not include the 115kg male but did in the chart for some reason).

Yes, at the moment they decided to end the cat's life, he weighed 95kg. At the time of the capture he weighed 115kg because he was found near a carcass. Indeed he appeared bloated/gorged at that time. But if you search up photos, you'll see the male is almost emaciated. Not surprising considering he was in great stress and apparently started to eat his own paw... So no his body condition was far from 'fine'.

The weight of the cat was actually obtained and all of them were presented from the authors of the table. If you want them to add every capture to the table if a cat is captured more than once and weighed, that's your prerogative, not theirs. It takes nothing away from the accuracy of the table.
And like I said, "it's possible" since of course you have 3 weights used in the range of 90-95kg yet you only have one mention of a maximum of 91kgs then the only other was a 95kg corrected from 115kg. On top of that, you only even have 1 actual cat mentioned in scientific study or communication that has reached 90kg+. There is no other cat that's reached 90kg so again that is far more questionable. 
And there is absolutely nothing in the photos that shows him to be emaciated. His paw was removed because of injury from the snare. 

Quote:It's a standard procedure that they weigh, take blood, clean or heal wounds, remove a snare for example, ... And then keep, publish or submit the data. In this case it's held private until now. Your verification in this case is again first-hand source Iman Memarian who's also mentioned in the study as the source of this 115kg male.

It absolutely isn't a standard procedure. In fact weighing is a luxury rarely obtained. 

Quote:Actually I'm already fine with the weight mentioned in the study and it being included in the weight chart. It is you who refuses to accept it hence why you, me and another person received voice messages of Iman Memarian who confirms it once more.

"High and low numbers", well especially the higher ones when there are multiple figures. Again if you need examples just let me know.

You are fine with them because after you continuously tried to discredit them you got proven wrong.
Funny enough, you know sit and defend alleged 90kg weights without any verification of a single cat other than one that is highly contested. 
In regards to Iman, you again shoot yourself in the foot

Quote:He said that but it's not what he meant. This is due to a language barrier.

Like it's been stated, we have 0 confirmation of weighing at 115kg only at 95kg. We have 0 confirmation of body dimensions even though they were said to exist. You want to use the excuse of language barrier issues yet want to assume him stating he was there for "a" weighing to be the 115kg over the 95kg or the 90kg?  

Quote:Similar already that is without so much data compared to Pantanal jaguars. I'm not talking about averages I'm talking about the frequency in %. Again data has been collected and the figures originate from different populations yet they (+80kg males) already occur despite a small sample. Gather a sample of northern Iranian males only and the frequency only increases.

Over double digits? Please post all the data there is of northern Iranian male leopards and we'll see how many data there is. Less than a dozen I tell you.

And like you've been shown time and time again, it doesn't matter which leopard population you use the Female Pantanal jaguar reaches said weights more frequently. 

Quote:Over double digits? Please post all the data there is of northern Iranian male leopards and we'll see how many data there is. Less than a dozen I tell you.

Again? We literally already did this in Carnivora. 
So once again.
21 adult males between 40-91kg. Average 65kg and mostly from the North per the Author of the actual study. 
On top of that, per the vets and data collected, all were between 70-88kg, none even reaching 90kg. Pantanal Jaguars reach 90kg's far more often than 1/21 individuals and of course of the study mentioned only 6/21 even reached the 80-90kg mark. This is of course without any real verification of a single Leopard over the 90kg mark outside of the amputated male and not to mention the likely scenario of that male being used twice. 

Quote:No male weighed over 90kg that they witnessed you mean. Obviously the creators of the study weren't there with each and every leopard which would otherwise mean they have data of 22 males. They sent you like what, 3 males? And that's assuming they were included in the study.

They didn't use the 95kg figure, and they only included the 115kg male in the chart but not for calculating the average weight. The 95kg is never mentioned in the study at all. It's only mentioned that a 95kg male was euthanized via a Facebook post.

No, I mean no male over 90kg with verification from the vet or capturing officer. 
He sent me all the males the 5 males from Tandoureh National park, the two largest males they received plus the 3 other males from C and S. On top of the confirmation of the 21 males averaging 70kg being from the N. 

Quote:He said that but it's not what he meant. This is due to a language barrier. He means that an adult male will weigh at least 70kg unless you believe a prime male at around 7 years of age weighs only 70kg in northern Iran? Meanwhile prime males in South African averaged 72kg and there's absolutely no way they're bigger than northern Iranian male leopards. So please elaborate

Once again, don't twist what he actually said into your skewed language of it. I was the one speaking to him, I asked the questions and I know how it was used. He said a prime male would weigh around 70kg. His table shows an average of 65kg give or take 3kg and he mentions older being 50kg. 
And once again, you're using a private reserves small sample size as an entire species for S. African averages? You skew too many things to twist your way out of claims and not to mention, there is absolutely a chance of them being bigger than Persians or at least the same size. 

Quote:Do you hold the same criteria for jaguars? Because for leopards you demand "confirmation on weighing at the time of capture" or "photos of a scale on site" or "weighing process" but for jaguars a simple answer via Facebook/Instagram where a weight has been given, it's okay. And there have been answers where circa weights were given. Plus a huge male is added but was never accurately weighed. It was too heavy to correctly weigh him so an estimation was given and it was included in the table. Nice "weighing process".

You can't be serious. 
For Jaguars like it's been stated a thousand times already, we have first hand conformation of the capture from the one involved. Weights, measurements, images of the capture and so on. Do you really want to compare the process used for them compared to an IG verbal correspondence? 
Or no existence of the Leopard used for the weight at all? In fact, almost all of them are 2nd hand to begin with. 
If you play that game you get severely beaten. 

Quote:I'm not using that table as if it's an offical figure. It's still circa 76kg. You can call it bickering.

 
What a surprise, why would you use verified data over your personal opinion when you're proven wrong? 

Quote:"It's probably safe to assume..." that's an assumption. Let's not forget you were butthurt that Persian male leopards overall already come close to Pantanal jaguaresses without focusing on a specific population. You immediately brought up excuses such as possible sub-adult jaguaresses being included. Or a different protocol was used for the Persian leopards. How about you prove Persian leopard skulls were measured the "Ward/Sci way"?

Hence why I don't state it as fact but make sure to use valid points to back said opinion. 
The only one "butthurt" here is you, which is why you continously spew nonsense over and over again after being proven wrong. 
So we're clear because you change your tone so often, you are now saying Persian Males come close to Pantanal female Jaguars?
Ok, that's acceptable. They do come close and can even overlap with them, they just don't do so as often. 
In regards to the skull measurements, I literally presented the SCI and Ward measurements, what are you talking about?
Even if they weren't done so, they still are smaller than Female Pantanal Jaguars on average. 

Quote:You said he never went to Brazil so he never saw a jaguar. But you don't have to go to Brazil per se to see a jaguar. We don't know if he has seen one in real life. And yes he has experience in both Central and West Africa so he has every right to claim that Gabonese male leopards are bulky and look more like jaguars.

Huh? 
How else are you going to see a Pantanal Jaguar? 
We're not comparing a Jaguar in the Zoo to a Wild Congo Basin Leopard are we? Can I compare Congo Leopards to Pantanal Jaguars because I've seen African Leopards in the wild? Can I compare Persian Leopards to wild Pantanal Jaguars because I've seen Persians in the zoo? 

Quote:I'd be careful with the claim that Dutoit has seen "100s of leopards". He might have seen the same individual more than once plus he likes to repost a lot so the amount of Instagram posts isn't a good indicator. Lastly Henschel is the reason we started seeing Gabonese leopards via camera trap. He has seen more than he published for sure. I doubt Dutoit has ever been to a remote location closed for tourists and started placing camera's in order to capture leopards like Henschel did.

What is there to be careful about?
He's been guiding for decades, you see Leopards almost every trip. On top of that, he also goes as a professional photographer so he doesn't even need to go with guests. His IG and FB alone have tons of them from all over Africa. Don't try and skew it like they are all "reposts" since you can see numerous different specimens. In fact, I posted dozens of them the last time you made an excuse about him not seeing big males or males from other parts of Africa. You remember right? Like all other excuse you make, the tried to twist something and throw it against the wall to see if it sticks. At the end of the day, Henschel hasn't seen even remotely close to the amount of Leopards Dutoit has. That was by his choice, he chose to study a remote part of Africa where wildlife viewing is very difficult. When you guide you have to find animals to view, it's how they make their money. Animal spottings=Tips.

Quote:That article is old, from 2010. He has seen more than 5 leopards and I've already proven that he doesn't just sit behind a computer looking at camera traps in the past.

It doesn't matter, he specifically mentions that was over a 5 year process. At that rate, he's seen 20 now. 
And no one ever said he sits behind a computer, camera traps have to be placed on site. Don't put words in my mouth. 

Quote:The table itself is "fan made" but the figures are exclusively from scientific sources. And Rowland Wards isn't scientific data, it's a hunter record.

Lol
The Skulls used are from museum collections that are 2nd hand. You can almost guarantee they are hunted, or at least a few of them. Wards are measured by verified measurers like any other and are all sourced and seen first hand. They are no different, hunters have the highest library of specimens, that's common sense. 

Quote:There's nothing to exaggerate; the 290+ mm skull already had a condylobasal length of 264 mm - the longest ever recorded. That means there's the sagittal crest that must be measured too to conclude the total length of the skull. This can add a great portion. That skull would've measured at least 290 mm and Chui was conservative to give a 297 mm length but it could've passed the 300 mm mark too.

 This same nonsense again
CBL doesn't = TL. Hence why some have shorter CBL while having longer TL and vice versa. 
And what are you talking about with the sagittal crest? TL is from one side to the other, not over the curves. 
And just so you understand 
https://imgur.com/5kOZy9i
The second longest skull had a CBL of 246mm 
The longest CBL belonged to a skull with the TL of 278mm
The 2nd longest CBL belonged to a skull with the TL of 275mm
The whole list shows a random correlation of CBL to TL. 
So I suggest you look at it closer before trying to make that claim again.

Quote:Our previous debate was which cat generally surpassed the 80kg mark. Remember on Carnivora? But as I said you fled the scene.

Fled the scene?
I'm right here proving you wrong again. And the previous debate was the same as this, Pantanal Jaguars. 


At this point we're done, you present no new data and you continuously twist and turn away from the facts to try and change the goalpost. 

*This image is copyright of its original author

Are you going to say he hasn't seen Lioness either? Reply