Barbary or Atlas lions

[Matias]

                                                                                     Very Interesting

Assessing uncertainty in sighting records: an example of the Barbary lion

 

Link: https://peerj.com/articles/1224/

 

The establishment of veracity criteria in the Barbary Lions observation narratives is making the mistake. If the initial premise is false, then the rest is. In the case of the Barbary Lion, none of the 32 sightings was formally accepted. I do not believe that no matter how logical a probabilistic study can determine a correct conclusion beforehand, the truth of a series of observations can not be the direct result of a logical and putative reasoning. Logical, mathematical, and statistical principles can not determine qualitative methods of sightings. Reliability, authenticity and truthfulness can not be measured scientifically. Although co-participant and interested, this study does not support or suggest that Barbary Lions may have survived until the late 1950s or early 1960s, as advocated by Mr. Simon Black. Due to the fragility and utter lack of authenticity of the 32 sightings the "Sightings Teory" can not withstand any evidence of Barbary Lions after the 1930s.

Note: Along with Nobuyuki Yamaguchi Simon Black is reference in the study of Barbary Lions. Both are considered the greatest references in the subject. It is not because I mention it in the paragraph above that I stop acknowledging to appreciate your ideas and your contributions. I also believe that after 20 years of dedication in the study of the Barbary Lions he has developed a "feeling" and "intuition" that leads him to believe, even though he can not prove, that his survival was slow to disappear.

Reply