WildFact
›
Members Corner
›
Tips, Guides, Tutorial & Technical Problem
About methods, measurements, errors, baits and the art of debating
About methods, measurements, errors, baits and the art of debating
|
About methods, measurements, errors, baits and the art of debating
|
1 - INTRODUCTION
Some time ago, a poster interested in (morphological data of) extinct and extant wild big cats joined our forum. His posts quickly revealed he was both well-informed and able in many respects. A potential asset, it was concluded. WaveRiders, as he called himself, apparently shared this conclusion and underlined his abilities whenever possible. He immediately demanded the tutor part and it has to be said he gave it what he had. The disadvantage of tutors is they do not treat their pupils on, ehhh, equal terms. They correct them when they take a wrong turn. Another disadvantage is they usually are reluctant to disclose their sources, in this way frustrating every attempt to get to a debate. When it is added Wave quickly extended his territory, one could say the countdown more or less started when he arrived. Not the best way to make friends, but in the end only quality counts. Or does it? Within a few weeks, the mood changed. When animosity replaced irritation, turbulence had to be expected and we were not disappointed. One of the owners of the forum had to intervene to solve the problem. Although Wave, regarding the owners, had used plenty of honey to prevent problems, the decision wasn't in his favour. He left, but not quite. Posters like Wave only leave when they've scored a late winner. Expecting him to return sooner or later in a different place, a small but tasteful bait was placed. Although it is likely more posters interested in bears and tigers found it, Wave, as expected, was the only one who really went for it. After a barrage of 8-inch shells, the owner of his new hotel said enough was enough. His last posts were severely edited and the guns were sold. Today it's all quiet on the western front. Other factors also contributed to the armistice. One of these no doubt was the lack of mobilization in the country that was shelled. The reason they didn't respond to the shelling is they knew wars don't solve problems. Wars usually are a continuation of politics. They start when talks end and the other way round, so peace talks it is. If they are to be resumed, however, the participants should agree on the topics. In this case, all generals agreed on the topics delivered by Wave. Before a hotel with room service in a friendly country will be selected, the bait used by one side needs to be discussed. I am referring to the 'error' in a number of post on tigers and bears in the tiger-extinction thread (2). After agreement has been reached, I propose to start the talks with a debate on methods. Methods to measure wild big cats, I mean (3). We also need to have a look at the reliability of hunting records (4). Same for measurements published by today's biologists (5). Another topic is the interpretation of articles in which morphological parameters of wild big cats feature (6). The most interesting by far would be the noble art of debating (7). Before we start, I want to make it clear that this thread isn't intended for executions. Wave, as a result of the shelling in August, will be addressed, but the intention is to get to a true debate on the topics mentioned above. One based on arguments only. This means that posts of those interested in something else will be deleted right away. As two are needed to debate, WaveRiders is invited to present his case himself. Here and not somewhere else, I mean. This means that the ban, of which I knew nothing (I was away for some time), will be lifted. As the shelling was severe and the ones targeted didn't quite agree, the debate could be heated in some respects. But skills are best tested in heated debates. I will definitely contribute in all departments mentioned above. Remember the remark on arguments only and good luck, Peter. 
Since I am still in contact with both Warsaw and Waveriders atm and we are specifically debating about this very topic, I will add my 2 cents and ask your opinion.
This debate actually started when I showed the comparison table made by Guate in regards to the Amur to the Russian Bear. Warsaw then went on to claim the amurs were measured over the curves. This is where I think a bit of an agenda took place, because when bringing the topic up that the bears were most likely measured over the curves as well and the fact that their curves are far more pronounced than the tigers which would add even more length he never really responded to that. From that debate it went on to if infact the STP report tigers used on the Amur table were measured over the curves or in a straight line. Since the report quoted the Nowell & Jackson method of measuring in straight line, that is why it was used. Warsaw began to make assumptions based of one image from a STP report that had nothing to do with the scientists whos tigers were used for the table and the report never once stated anything in regards to measuring over the curves. I showed the large male who is being measured while lying on his back and that was neglected by him and not discussed. It then spiraled into Bengals and he began to claim that Sunquist tigers were measured over the curves like Karanth's tigers. I showed the emails from Sunquist specifically stating he measured them in a straight line and warsaw tries to claim that Karanth's tigers are the same as Sunquists tigers. On waverider, he then joined the debate later, the only issue is the dismissal of emails from Sunquist then his claim of emails received from the stp report as proof, but he has yet to provide any such emails, so the claims without evidence is the real issue I see, especially since these claims would allegedly back his and Warsaws argument while dismissing evidence via email that would be detrimental to his argument. Those are the issues I had with them, but that being said, Both are very knowledgeable and I enjoy discussing this with them. I've posed this question before, but I will ask again If anybody here has conclusive evidence on the following topics -How was the STP tigers measured that were used in Guates tables? -How did Sunquist measure his tigers compared to Karanth? -Did sunquist and karanth measure the same tigers? I think that is it 
Actually, what matters above all is a peaceful debate and not thrashing each other, this is really a childish behavior. I like both waverider and warsaw, there are no doubts they both are very knowledgeable and we must respect knowledge but what we don't like is disturbance in form abusing, thrashing and getting aggressive during debates (that's really diminish your credibility and knoweldge and mature people want to avoid it).
I have said many times, when you debate you must have understanding of actually what is debate and how you should do it, in my opinion a debate is meant to give arguments, proofs, source and understand others inputs. For a debate, you must be prepare for others contradicting your information since it is part of debate and for this you should never get aggressive and abusive with others (difference between mature and youngster). Don't make it personnel issues and hurt on self respect, instead you can gently leave a debate and start focusing on other topics. So in short a debate should be gentlemen game. Now, problem is on both side waverider get aggressive and attack, while guate also sometime get angry and lashes, while both side get aggressive for each other but what they forget is the information, data and knowledge pouring during their debate. They get so aggressive and hyper that they ignore the great piece of information they learned while debating. Take it on ego, start trashing and the result is death of great flow of knowledge. Believe me you all are very knowledgeable person and have lot of info to share with worlds, only thing you guys required is to be more thoughtful when you debate. Just change the habit of bad debating and you will see places like this forum will fill with lot of good information for upcoming generation and your contribution will live forever. Just think. Edit: I have lift on the ban from waveriders for obvious reason 
@peter, thanks for making this topic, but I guess that @WaveRiders is not going to come, or, he will just full the place with empty words and no evidence.
I am going to post my stand here soon, for question of time I have not reply yet. Await my next post.
2 - THE ERROR IN THE THREAD 'ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION' (tigers)
In the fifth paragraph of my first post in this thread, I referred to an error in a number of posts on tigers and bears in southeastern Russia. I wrote the 'error' was in fact a bait. I also wrote I would explain later. In this post, I will deliver. I will start at the beginning. As the post is a long one, I decided to use paragraphs. For those interested in the proceedings. In the first part of the post (a-g), I offer my opinion on some actions of the poster WaveRiders on WildFact from the perspective of a co-owner who was addressed without him knowing anything about it. The last part is a personal contribution to a (largely virtual) debate on a number of issues not discussed when WaveRiders was a member of this forum. For this reason, WaveRiders is Wave. a - A mistake in a number of posts on tigers and bears Some months ago, in the thread mentioned above (see the title), I referred to a recent study conducted in southeastern Russia. Seryodkin was involved. To me, it was about the weight of the three adult male brown bears they studied. In my post, I wrote all males were Ussuri brown bears (Ursus arctos lasiotus). This, however, was not the case. One of the bears was from a very different region. Some days after my post, a reader contacted me with a few questions. I then realized I had made a mistake. At first, I wanted to correct my posts. Later, I decided against it. For now. Here's why. b - Why it wasn't corrected Bears and tigers still are 'hot' on animals forums. Furthermore, I am co-owner of this forum. This means it is likely my posts will be read by those interested in bears and tigers. Some of these are members of other forums and a few of these, for different reasons, carry a grudge. As they in particular are well-informed, chances were the mistake would be noticed. I expected only one of them would respond in public. The poster I had in mind is a former member of this forum. WaveRiders left with a smallish grudge when I had to intervene in a heated debate which turned inproductive. I expected him to pay his respects sooner or later. A bit far-fetched, some of you no doubt will say. True, but the well-informed and the proud usually are one and the same and they in particular are the ones who carry and feed a grudge, no matter how small. I know many of them will seek retribution in some way. I can hear you say 'Could be, but a forum isn't an arena, is it'? I disagree. A forum in particular is very suited, because it is in the public domain for all to see. As retribution usually means honour saved, it also means the opponent has to pay. In public if possible, as this would mean both honour saved and loss of face for the opponent(s). If Wave would have recovered from the turbulence in a way fitting his knowledge, he would have contacted me to solve the problem. This would have produced the desired result. If he opted for something different, he had to face a few things. Anticipating the second option, a mirror was borrowed. c - The flipside of arrogance I can hear you say 'What had to be faced'? The answer is arrogance has a lot of disadvantages. WaveRiders probably read more books and documents than most of us. Apart from that, he (suggested he) is connected to science in some way. He also was in Africa to talk with lions. Excellent credentials, one would think. In spite of all that, he succeeded in creating animosity even before he had settled. Why was that? My guess is he, regarding the books and documents often mentioned in forums, got to different conclusions. He could have asked a question to get to an interesting debate, but opted for a method which resulted in the opposite: he refused to disclose his sources. Monopolizing knowledge opposes the method scientists prefer. They in particular refer to peer-reviewed documents when debating. One of those who opposed him in public was a mod. Although mods make mistakes as well, they need to be respected. It is a fact this rule was ignored. When things got heated, all mods were just about done with WaveRiders. I had no option but to intervene. In my post, he was again confronted with the disadvantages of his way of communicating. He wasn't dismissed, but encouraged to adopt another method of interacting. My post had no effect. d - A new home but no change WaveRiders left our forum and joined another. His first posts were a continuation of the would-be debate he left months earlier. From a distance, covered by his new tanks and with the 8-inchers in front of him, his flawless paragraphs were replaced by armour-piercing shells. When the owner of the new hotel found out about it, however, WaveRiders was forced to sell his guns. e - Conclusions One is that WaveRiders, in spite of his suggested connection to science, ignored a number of important scientific rules. Two is he ignored fundamental rules of interaction. Three is he lives by his own rules. Four is he uses them to his advantage. Five is he is not to be addressed. f - My response to the problems in WildFact I told him I intervened to prevent a war and to back the mod attacked. I did it in a friendly way, because I do not dislike those who live by their own rules and really know about tigers, lions and bears. There are, however, limits and he crossed them when he insulted our mods. I know mistakes have been made and I also know it will take time to learn, but I like them no matter what and will always back them. The reason is they are honest, committed and heavily involved in the world they are interested in. This in spite of conditions unknown in countries where wildlife has disappeared a long time ago. Notice I didn't refer to their education. They are well-educated, but it is about something else. g - The bait I offered WaveRiders the opportunity to respond to the error I made (I didn't inform Guate and the others about it) and he went for it. But it wasn't about the error, Wave. It was about how you would respond to the opportunity, as this would reveal those departments of the soul many of us cover with degrees, tables, experience and flawless paragraphs. What did we see? h - Your response It is a fact your demons again got the better of you. When going over the error, you couldn't avoid indulging in red lines, personal comments in red, red paragraphs and red arrows. After dismantling all illusions of those interested in our forum, your brother in arms was introduced. The poster who had been opposing the ignorant for years. You first congratulated him on his work and endurance. This was necessary, as you would use some of the results later. Than the main dish was served. They were projections of the terrible mistakes you had exposed. They included " ... repeated mistakes, twists, misinterpretations and so on ... " (your post of August 23, 2015). Mistakes, unfortunately, are human. It was about something else, meaning you concluded that that some of these 'repeated mistakes and twists' were made " ... intentionally ... " (your post of August 23, 2015). In your post mentioned above (see the previous paragraph), you realized it takes two to debate: " ... For a fair gentleman challenge I should await for Peter to come back and reply ... ". In spite of that, you couldn't overcome the urge to administer more punishment. In your post of August 29, 2015 (the one severely deleted by Taipan later), you wrote " ... when Moderators will not offend users any more ..., when the philosophy of the website may have changed and users not following the unidirectional stream of excessive tiger bias and having a different understanding of size, weights, stomach contents ... ". Some time later, you added " ... I can guarantee you (he was talking to Grizzly) that I can hit Guate and Peter even harder with my scientific and logic weapons of sort of that ..., but it would absolutely not be my nature to do that ... ". As usual, you contradicted yourself just a little further on when you wrote " ... I put my armour on, took my sword and shield ... " (all quotes in this paragraph are from your severely edited post in Carnivora of August 29, 2015). i - Evaluation I could say a lot, but I can also keep it short and say I saw frustration at work. Frustration usually is a result of lack of recognition. There was no need, Wave. Quality isn't the problem. Adjustment is. When you want to interact, you got to accept a few rules. When you declare yourself exempt and post statements that can't be checked and mix them with insults, then don't complain about the results. My advice is to ignore the urge to defend the point you made at all costs. When you like to interact about the things you are interested in, join a forum and respect the other participants. At times, it will result in something good and at times it will not. When you buy a sword every time you're not quite satisfied, others will treat you accordingly. j - Preference I plead guilty to preference to a degree, but I only practise in my own house and it didn't result in distortions. When I don't post, I read. The threads our new mod Majingilane created, often featuring the brotherhood, are very interesting. I could say a lot more, but the point is accusations have to be based on facts, not something else. You also have to distinguish between mistakes and deliberate misinformation. Nearly all of us produce mistakes at a quite alarming rate, but that doesn't mean they were a result of doubtful intentions or extreme preference. Most are a result of slops or assumptions. Another reason is unclear information in peer-reviewed documents. k - Unclear information 1 - Forest Officers. A century and a half ago, in the UK, those trained to become Forest Officers in India were taught to measure big cats in a straight line. Many of them did, but some adapted to local habits when in India. How find your way in the books some of them wrote? You read them and do it again. In spite of that, mistakes will be made. The reason is a lack of clear information. Not something else. 2 - Hunters. A century and a half ago, a debate on how to measure a dead big cat in what was then British India erupted between hunters. Most big cats were measured 'over curves'. An unreliable method, it was concluded. Sterndale proposed a new method to measure big cats ('between pegs'). More reliable, they thought. After the debate had been concluded, some hunters adopted the new method. Most, however, did not. The reason was it wasn't easy to measure a big cat in wild India. There was no flat surface, there was no help to move the tiger and many just didn't have the time to give it a try. For this reason, every book or article which has measurements has to be read with care. In quite many cases, the attempt to get to a conclusion will prove to be fruitless. The reason is a lack of clear information. Not something else. 3 - Biologists. When I became interested in big cats, I talked to biologists (and zoologists). The aim was to find out in what way big cats are measured. Dr. P. van Bree told me they have to be measured in a straight line ('between pegs'). The (steel) tape shouldn't be pressed against the body. It should be used to measure the straight line between the markers (nose, insertion of the tail and the last bone of the tail) made on the floor. The distance between them is measured when the cat is removed. In our country, students are taught to do it in that way. Other biologists confirmed. I visited a biologist in Belgium and talked to Dr. D. Morike in Stuttgart. Same answer. However. The peer-reviewed documents I read often are unclear, if not outright confusing. Some biologists measured big cats themselves 'between pegs', whereas others used old hunting records. In some books, it isn't clear in what way the big cats mentioned were measured. In others, both methods ('over curves' and ;'between pegs') were used. In one and the same table, I mean. At times, things got mixed up. Could have been a printing error and could have been a result of something else. The table on the size of Amur tigers in the great book of Heptner & Sludskij is a good example in that it has both reliable and unreliable records. It took me a long time to find the information I was after. Not something one expects when reading a book written by competent biologists, but there you have it. The conclusion is you have to find your way each and every time. Nothing can be taken for granted. If mistakes are made, they are a result of unclear information or confusion. Not something else. l - Back to the 19th century: Today's tiger authorities, methods and peer-reviewed documents What I know is as result of reading, interviews and practise (skulls and big cats). When I thought I knew enough, assumptions crept in. One of these was today's biologists measure big cats in a straight line. Wrong. If I was forced to express an opinion right now, I would say most probably don't. Not in the way it should be done, I mean. Methodwise, one could say we re-entered the 19th century and be right. A bit over the top? No. Ullas Karanth, an undisputed authority on wild tigers, wrote measurements taken 'between pegs' are anything but reliable (...) and he was bloody serious about it. This most probably meant Nagarahole tigers had been measured 'over curves'. As he also wrote they compared to those in Chitwan and Russia, I became a bit nervous. I mean, if he was right, it meant tigers in Nepal and Russia also had been measured 'over curves'. This was about a decade ago, well before I joined a forum. I decided to read more about Chitwan and Russia. After reading everything I found, I concluded the Chitwan tigers were measured in a more or less straight line. But it also is a fact the tape was pressed to the body. Not how it should be done. After reading Sunquist's emails, I settled for something close to 'between pegs'. I admit I'm not too sure, though. One reason is Dr. Tamang, regarding the same tigers, wrote they were measured 'over curves'. The debate on who is right never started. I than turned to Russia. The conclusion was all Amur tigers mentioned in old books and articles were measured 'over curves'. In 1992, the Siberian Tiger Project started. American biologists introducing modern devices, Russian biologists walking the forests to get to the core of things, translations of old Russian books and new documents. It was a very promising prospect and when I read the Appendix in the document about the morphology of Amur tigers, the nervousness regarding methods and measurements largely disappeared. I mean, why publish an Appendix on how to measure a big cat in the correct way and then ignore it? But I wasn't sure. m - On the consequences of misinformation by biologists Let's assume wild Amur tigers, as Ullas Karanth indirectly suggested, also were measured 'over curves'. If so, I would be interested to find out why those involved decided to ignore the Appendix mentioned before and re-enter the 19th century. If tigers were measured 'over curves' in the last decades, it means the general public was misinformed. It would also mean the information I posted on the length of today's tigers is largely incorrect. If so, the question is if it has to be qualified as deliberate misinformation. In order to get to an answer, one first has to find the answer to the question if those who wrote the documents I used were explicit regarding the method used to measure tigers. If it was mentioned, the question is where. Readers also have responsability. But should they be prepared for what seems to be a strategy directed at evasion? If questions on methods are not answered, should they contact those who (co-)wrote documents which have measurements? Why is it so many biologists writing documents do not address vital questions? Why is it so many get to general statements when their sample is unreliable? Why is it so many old books loaded with measurements are dismissed out of hand when it is also known that those who dismiss apparently use the same method? Why is it that not one biologist or zoologist even attempted to get to a real good, read onjective, appreciation of old records? Why is it modern records have not been evaluated? n - On forums, methods, measurements and misinformation When interacting with others about methods, measurements and the reliability of records, one has to be careful with words and accusations. Those who post on methods and measurements in this forum read everything available. There also have been plenty of discussions about methods in different threads. If mistakes were made in spite of that, they were not a result of deliberate misinformation or preference, but a result of a lack of clearity in peer-reviewed documents. One has to remember that interpretations start when good information is lacking. Posters who accuse others of misinformation the public, knowing they could have been misled by biologists who apparently don't know how to measure a big cat and, on top of that, also refrained from offering crucial information on the method used in the documents they published, not only compare to them, but deliberately misuse the predictable results of flawed documents in order to get to a confirmation of a statement resulting from a grudge which could have been prevented if they had just learned to to interact in a productive way. How to satisfy the urge to get even in any possible way, lesson one. But the debate was about something different, remember? o - Suggestions As far as I'm concerned, you can join the debate any time. When you do, remember it isn't about the result. The road you follow also is important. When you walk that road and interact in an honest way, you'll win a few encounters and most probably lose a lot more. Many people think they reach their summit when they win the challenges they face. I don't agree. People shine when they learn to accept they can't have it their way most of the time. The best of these manage to interact in a respectful way, in spite of a few disappointments. More often than not, they deliver quality at every opportunity. What I'm saying is it could be more productive to reach 50% of your objective in a good climate than 90% in one loaded with viruses yet to be discovered. One day, they will find you. In a system in which only few decide, a mistake often has way more effect than in a system where all have a voice. Never underestimate your fellow man. Unexplored territory, but very important. Same in sports and music. I know a bit about both as it was there I made my living. In order to play real good music, you need good musicians. A good miscian is someone who knows how to use his abilities. The best support others, erasing flaws while doing so. The one affected will respond, in this way inspiring his collegues. If all understand and participate, they will reach a stage in which they are capable of anything. This is the moment they will not forget. Although it has yet to be proven, I do not doubt that the energy created in this way is very real and very productive. Beats everything you hope to achieve on your own. It only is created when you really cooperate and make 'm shine and it can't be trained or taught. This is where humans could excel. This is my best effort. Make up your mind. When you like to win no matter what, stay away. When you are able to accept life as it comes and deliver quality in spite of the often difficult conditions, report for duty. I will post on the other issues mentioned in my first post in some time, but not now. Time to indulge in a bit of music. Regards, Peter.
I was willing to forget this dark issue, caused by @WaveRiders, but I saw his last post on Carnivora and is really rubbish how this guy is trying not only to discredit me, but the entire forum in the process. For that reasons, I think is time to slap him in the face and clean some of the crap that he is spreading there. I am going to separate the important point here, to avoid confusion.
1. Who is @WaveRiders? The first time that we met was in the old AVA forum, and I was pleased that he had good knowledge of prehistoric great cats. We had good conversations and our conclusions were acceptable. Some time latter, he disappeared. In this year, he entered here and I was pleased again, taking in count that he had good references in our old conversations. Sadly, the Wave that came here was just s shadow of the one in AVA. This new person was arrogant, excluded ANY evidence presented by the posters and NEVER, I repeat NEVER, showed a single drop of evidence. I entered in the game and the result was that Waveriders was injured in his pride and leave the place. Well, time passed until some posters here and in Carnivora (oh yes, I have people there that PM me about your activities there...) warned me that this person was trashing @peter and me in that forum. It was an unpleasant surprise to see that the good poster, that have became an arrogant one, now transformed in a common troll, showing his own opinions and searching old mistakes in order to attack me and the forum. He always said that he was a "professional", but clearly his actions showed the contrary. I am not a saint, but I had never hidden my character and my personality, and over all, I always speak in the face of my contender. What @WaveRiders has done in Carnivora was a COWARD move that finally showed his true colors. In fact, a "professional" don't do that, unless that the idea of "professionalism" of Waves means to attack people at his back. He manage to found two real mistakes and two nonsense, one of them an old issue that was already corrected. Let's see them: a. Weights of bears: http://carnivoraforum.com/topic/9380132/27/ Yes, I included the three bears and my mistake was not to check the document. I created a new image but he insisted in irrelevant issues. What a waste of time for him, as NO ONE cares about his post. The image stands, one big fail for his agenda. b. The pregnant tigress: http://carnivoraforum.com/topic/9329149/6/ Good one, I put the date wrong, so he proved that the tigress was in fact pregnant during her capture. However, taking in count that a tiger cub weigh about 1 kg (less in the womb) and the average of 14 kg for a baited tigress (probably even less in 24 hours period), the empty belly weight of that tigress was still about c.148 kg or even more, not that far of my c.150 kg estimation. Again, no one gives a damn to his post. Second big fail Wave. c. The lions from "Ngorongoro": http://carnivoraforum.com/topic/9329122/3/ This one is an epic fail from him, because those males were already classified in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area long before he even showed that in a particular topic of this forum. If he is willing to see my old tables of the East African lions, it is quite clear that the lions were labeled as "Ngorongoro C. A." It seems that Wave can't read (what does not suit him). d. Measurements of the Hobatore lions, check post 45: http://carnivoraforum.com/topic/9329122/3/ This last one show how desperate is this ridiculous person to gain attention, after three failed intents. He claim that I was unable to see how those lions were measured and he state this: Waveriders wrote: "The correct head-and-body length from nose tip to tail root is obviously computed adding the head length, the neck length (not reported for the largest animal but roughly estimable if one wants to do it) and the body length." Where he get that the neck length was not included??? Check this out please:  *This image is copyright of its original author It say "From the base of neck to base of tail". The base of neck is also called "nape", so let's see a few images of the nape in lions:  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author And of course, this:  *This image is copyright of its original author At the base of neck to the base of tail. Sadly, for Wave now the images, magically are not evidence!!! Four shoots, four ignored posts, but from these two were HIS mistakes. Finally, the moral issue. He claim that he is/was a "professional" (in what? we certainly don't know). However, @Pckts ask him for evidence of his credentials and his "new" SUPPOSED travels along the globe (sic!). The answer of Wave was: "My credentials? I have no credentials. If I had credentials I would not be around. I am just WaveRiders, a man of science with some relevant field experience in the wilderness of 4 continents as a wildlife observer." AND "I showed one picture in case you did not realize that, The first time I have done in nearly 12 years. I am not interested in sharing my experiences in these kind of discussion and talk about my life. I wish you will be able to do one day all the experiences I already made in Africa and elsewhere." So, now he is a nobody, in his own words??? And the photos of the "trips", what happen with them??? As he claim that he is an "older" person, maybe he forgot where are them... A medicine of the mind can be useful Wave.  At the end, he is always the same crap: he say that he knows "information", but never show evidence, he says that have "contacts", but again, never say who are! He say that he knows a lot of methods and that his statements are always correct, but what he shows are just HIS OPINIONS and are never backup with data. He has never show anything new, and even about the prehistoric cats, now we know more than him thanks for the several published papers and our TRUE expert @tigerluver has show how wrong is he in many basic anatomical issues. Finally, in one of his previous statements he say this: "Please be aware that I have no time and will to debate fabricated e-mails. I do hope and actually firmly believe you or peter or GuateGojira would never come to a point to fabricate e-mails. It is out of my mind you or they could do it by themselves. I would imagine at most they may lie on occasions, they do not talk about clarification e-mails that proved them wrong or partly wrong or that for convenience they may refer to one or more posters who may have fabricated e-mails in the past (I am not necessarily talking about length methods and I may come back on this at some point in the future should anybody want to understand what I am talking about as I precisely know very well what I am talking about and would like to make a clarification on that)." Are you saying that @peter and I had forged information??? Here, Wave is anticipating the result of his move, he knows that we will not believe in his "communications" because he never show the evidence (he only copied a supposed answer now) and over all, this seems very fishy! Why he defend himself from something that has not happen? Is he actually planing to fake a conversation and since now, he is protecting his move? Certainly this seems the case here. In respect of the honor, @peter is one of the bests and most honorable posters and have showed this many times. And about me, I have always show ALL the data (something that he recriminated me, in a good form, in AVA), independently of the outcome. If not, let's remember this post: http://animalsversesanimals.yuku.com/rep...ord-205-kg I showed that mistake, even if it was mine and I was even praised for that. So, his claims that Peter and I are not honorable is just a puke of his brain. But what about him? He has never show any evidence, he now dedicate ONLY to show our mistakes (and the people still ignores him  ) and his acts of attacking a person by the back, show that he is, in fact, a person with no honor and in a trial, honorability adds to your testimony. Conclusion: It is evident that @WaveRiders is not a reliable person, and probably with problems of bipolarity, his acts show how dark and honorableness are his ways. If I am going to discuss with someone (like I has done with BoldChamp or Assad/Assadas) I answer to them in the face, not like the coward actions of Wave. So, I ask, are you going to believe in this obscure person, that has never provided evidence of his claims, that had acted like a coward, stabbing in the back of his contenders? An intelligent answer will be NO, but we know that some (just a few) hard-core fans over there will say the contrary. In his last post in Carnivora (in the lions topic) he stated that Peter, Tigerluver and I are "terribly biased" toward tigers and irrespective lions and bears. This was like a revelation because this show that the anger of Waveriders is not about Science, or measuring methods, is about the old and stupid theme of "Lion vs Tiger" and now also bears, thanks to Warsaw. Peter, I and other posters have showed information of several other animals, but he never attack it, he just go against all the information of tigers (coincidence?). So, if we are a tiger supporter, are we biased? Here we have several lion fans and we have excellent relations because we had forgotten the "vs" theme, but it seems that Wave has not (maybe, because of his age, he has forgotten where he is writing  ). Here in "WildFacts" we don't discuss "Vs" issues, we have evolved, maybe you should do the same Wave. He menaced me and other posters that he is going to search our old posts and will show our mistakes. I say "do it", I don't care, none of us care and in fact, it shows that you have noting productive to do. People like Peter, Tigerluver, myself and many other posters here take the risk and publish they finds. We are not free of mistakes, but between us we correct ourselves and reach the goal of the true information. People like you, Wave, are just sad persons that live seeking the dark point in the entire white sheet. I am 100% sure that this guy is not going to return here, for the simple reason that he is afraid. I wonder myself what is going to happen if I go to Carnivora, maybe he will just run away to another forum (The World of Animals perhaps), just like a rat run from the cat. You are unbanned now Wave, came here, let's see what happen. 
2. Measurements of tigers in Nepal:
This was an old issue that was already resolved in the AVA forum. I have three confirmations that the Nepalese tigers were measured in straight line, one was from Tigerlover (not @tigerluver), other from BoldChamp (A.K.A. Damon Ransom and Jimmy Brenton) and the last one to me. Let's put the emails again:  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author So, now, here is the confirmation to my person, in 2009:  *This image is copyright of its original author As you can see, it was a straight line and the tape was along the body. The issue here is that @WaveRiders is stating that the method used by scientists is the same that the old hunters that produced the exaggerated sizes, but that is a huge mistake. 1. Scientists put the tape along the back, in a straight line, they don't press the tape to enhance the length, but to sustain the tape, at the end the tape is straight, so is like measuring between pegs but without the use of two sticks. 2. Old hunters also put the tape at the back, but the problem with them is that they do pressed the tape loosely trough all the body and this obviously enhance the true size. That is why some records showed tigers of 11 and 12 ft long. I don't see any scientific tiger with that size because they don't search "trophy" specimens or to please any dignitary. Now, with the doubt in the air, I write to Dr Sunquist this month, but this time I add an image with his previous description. Here is his answer:  *This image is copyright of its original author Here is the image that I send to him:  *This image is copyright of its original author Confirmation, Nepalese tigers were measured in a straight line, and I am sure that Nagarahole tigers too. In a previous post (in the topic of the Amur and Bengal tigers) I explained that, but Waveriders say that it was "difficult to digest". So, I put it again, with images. In an article of 1997, Dr Ullas Karanth write this: "The Indian tigers are smaller with average males weighing around 200 to 250 kilograms and females a 100 kilos less. Indian tigers are about 155 to 225 centimetres long including head and body, with an additional tail length of 75 to 100 centimetres, if measured correctly along the body curves. However, many old shikar accounts report a nose to tail-tip distance, measured straight between wooden pegs (and, as a way suspected, sometimes between pegs of whisky) making it difficult to get accurate size estimates from them." Source: http://savingwildtigers.org/karanth.html Automatically many people believed that he was disproving any straight line measurement, but in fact, it is the method "between pegs from nose to tip of tail" what he disproved. I also stated that he, in some way, do not want to be confused with the old methods, that he described as "archaic". However, if he disprove the "between pegs" method, why he quotes Pocock (1939) as that those figures were specifically stated that were taken in that manner? Check this image, from a book of 2013 (chapter of the tiger, wrote by Dr Karanth):  *This image is copyright of its original author He say that old records were incorrectly derived and quotes Pocock (1929) when he presented many skins measurements, however when he mention the reliable records he quotes Pocock (1939). Now, check Pocock (1939):  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author Here is the confusion, Dr Karanth follow the idea that measurements "between tip to tip" are unsatisfactory (sadly many "between pegs" records came in this form) and that many old records don't even say the method. However, he still quoted Pocock (1939) like one of his only three principal sources, so it is obvious that he don't disprove anymore that method, as long as the head-body is stated and if the source is reliable. Are you going to quote a source that you believe is incorrect, for your data? Obviously not, and this document from 2013 shows that he no longer believe what is stated in 1997. Again, he mention that the measurements of modern records are "along the contour", but like we have see in Dr Sunquist email, that doesn't mean that they pressed the tape exaggerating the size, it is just when they are running the tape, but latter the line is kept straight. At the end, we most remember that Dr Karanth learned the method from Dr Sunquits, and two of those tigers were measured in Sunquist presence. If we check the images of tigers captured in India, most of them are in a straight line, and those that are not, are not been measured in that particular moment of the photograph. Check this photos from a dead cub and those of the young Nepalese tiger released in resent times.  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author Can you denied that these animals are been measured in a straight line with the tape along the back? As we can see, based in the presented evidence, that tigers in Nepal and Nagarahole are been measured in a straight line along the contours of the body, which according with Dr Sunquist, which have measured many tigers himself, is like to measure "between pegs", but without the pegs and with the body itself.
I have read the post of @peter. He is a gentleman like always and I respect him for that. From my part, I am a warrior, but I was trying to avoid useless wars anymore. Sadly, sometimes, waves of garbage arose and we need to clean it.
In my next post, I will talk about the measurements of the Amur tigers. Greetings to all. 
Amazing work guate, I am going to post this there since its so good and I think it needs to be seen by all.
If that is a problem I will remove it, but I think all should see this since its a benefit to the community. I will make sure and give you the due credit you deserve. Regards and thanks for such an amazing write up.
Hello @Pckts, there is no problem, you can post this in Carnivora.
In fact, I see that the stupid of @WaveRiders is still afraid of coming here and is hiding there. He post another bullsh.... there (same post 44): http://carnivoraforum.com/topic/9329122/3/ He insist that the base of the neck is in the lower part, let's show him his mistake again:  *This image is copyright of its original author Incredible that this ignorant and liar (because we now know what he is) insist in his own "believes" but this is simply because he is just another crazy lion-fanatic, so this is not a conversation about "science", is just the old issue of hard-core-lion-fans stick in the "vs" debate. Check this image of one of the larger lions:  *This image is copyright of its original author This lion is Hpl-6 (Masialeti) and measured 160 cm in head-body, the image show that size (he is barely longer than the Pantanal jaguar of 148 kg or the Sumatran tiger of the same weight) and check that is obvious that he had some stomach content. He is not comparable to other truly large males, like for example some truly large males from Hwange NP in Zimbabwe, which reached a head-body of up to 209 cm measured in the same way. As we can see, those lions are not particularly large, the longest barely c.180 cm, however as he is a biased hard-core tiger hater, he insist that those lions were incorrectly or incompletely measured. However, why in the world are going these "true" scientists to present incomplete measurements? That can only possible in the silly brain of Waves (of trash). He also insist in quoting post from 2014, JAJAJAJAJA! He is so stupid that the only thing that he can do is to show old "mistakes" (and already corrected ones). But let's face it, he has nothing better to do, as he has no honor, no credibility and is just a common troll. Check that the other poster still ignore him. However, check my table of February 2014:  *This image is copyright of its original author I already corrected that misunderstanding in that same month, so his silly try of show a "mistake" is simply idiotic, but that is how the "Waver of garbage" work.
Thanks guate, I posted it over there, its nice of you to lend a hand since you're the one who put in all this hard work and he is trying to discredit you and all you've done.
@WaveRiders is jealous of me because I managed to put so much data and presented the information like it is.
He is also jealous from @tigerluver because he is a real expert in prehistoric cats and proved Waves wrong several times. Finally he is jealous from @peter because he has made a great investigation trough classic literature and his study on skulls is incomparable. Tell me, what has Waves presented? What? Which are his contributions, from his "expertness"? It is clear, his hard-core-lion-biased brain can't tolerate that three (and many more posters here) are way better than him, even with his "hidden" data and unknown "contacts".
Ohhh, he makes a topic just for me! I don't even knew that I was so important for him, I fell flattered.
Check this: http://carnivoraforum.com/topic/10364052/1/ He is so idiotic that he now began to denied the evidence, even if he have it in the face. Typical of the hard-core fanatics, nothing new, I have saw that many times in AVA. Interestingly, none of the new images that he posted are actually visible (for me, at least). Is he hiding something? With his old age, is possible that he don't remember how to post images?  By the way, where I claimed that I have a communication with Dr Karanth stating the way of measurements? I have say many times, he don't answer sizes issues, he only said that between pegs was "an archaic method" and that was all. However, IF @WaveRiders is such a good "analyst", why he can't see the "crystal clear" evidence that Dr Karanth used the same method of Dr Sunquist? Ohhh, I forgot it, been a hard-core-tiger hater, all the evidence in favor of the tiger is simple "fake" or "misinterpretation". Poor Waveriders, desperate for attention, maybe in the real world he is so ignored that he needs to create an illusion were he is an "expert" and were he has "traveled trough all the world"!
 (09-18-2015, 12:30 AM)GuateGojira Wrote: @WaveRiders is jealous of me because I managed to put so much data and presented the information like it is. Guate, I'm a bit surprised you've allowed yourself to be drawn into such pettiness. This mirrors AVA - like nonsense. You're above that my good man
You are right @chaos, I am sorry that the posters here had to read all this, but he nailed and nailed and finally I delivered what he deserved.
However, at the end of the day, the important thing is the data. Maybe @peter or I could copy the issue of the data and leave the answer to Wave here, just the sake of time. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |