Overrated size of Munna aka Langda of Kanha National Park

[sanjay]

@"Bruinbark" - Rofl is not in any war with lion vs tiger and I also request you not to blame him for anything.
There is slightly misunderstanding between pckts and rofl.

According to rofl munna is normal tiger (Reason there is no scientific data on it)

According to pckts munna is big tiger (Some wildlife photographer say it)

So no Lion vs Tiger war here. Reply

[GuateGojira]

What a useless conversation guys, sorry but it is true.

Munna looks like a excellent sized tiger probably of 230-240 kg in his good days, but it is true that there are larger tigers over there. However, he is definitely not of "just 200 kg", that is an exaggeration.

Kanha have produced large tigers, with top records of 234 kg (Brander, 1923) and 255 kg (Hunter, 1896). A figure of 230 kg seems excellent for a tiger of the frame of Munna, but we most accept that pictures are tricky and "large" tigers could be light ones while "small" tiger can be heavier ones.

I propose to leave this conversation, as it is creating only infinite hypothesis without evidence.

Finally, ANY post with the dirty name of "Asad" will be erased, that name don't deserve to be mentioned in this holy place anymore, that garbage still live in "Carnivora forum" and soon or late, I will crush him/her there too, like I have done many times in AVA.
  Reply

[Pckts]

(08-19-2014, 09:18 PM)'Bruinbark' Wrote:

(08-19-2014, 01:25 PM)'Amnon242' Wrote:

(08-19-2014, 09:41 AM)'Bruinbark' Wrote: Ajajajaja, pathetic what Rolfcopters turned in to. A lionsider with a vengeance for tigers. He should just accept that tigers, while not common, can, and will hit 250kg on a basis. Lions, never. Or you can show me the data.

 

omg

please, do not bring that tiger vs lion nonsense here...
  

 

Hey Genius Amnon, maybe if you read, you will see Rofl noted that South African lions are larger than Munna, so I gave him a taste back of his own medicine.

 

I will guarantee that copters doesn't really think south african lions are larger than munna.
He is just being stubborn because he was wrong in regards to Munnas size and refuses to admit it.
He has shown his lack of maturity on this forum, I have offered numerous accounts from extremely reliable people all showing and discussing his size, Copters doesn't have a leg to stand on here. He's wrong and knows it. That's why he resorts to calling me "Asad" or "Stupid"

Anyway, it's obvious that there is nothing "overrated" about Munna. He is/was one of the most massive tigers if not the most massive in Kahna. Kahna is the largest tiger reserve with the most tigers I believe, its obvious he is the upper class of tiger size for that area. Nothing can change all of the accounts of his size.
  Reply

[Pckts]

(08-19-2014, 01:27 PM)'Amnon242' Wrote:

(08-15-2014, 09:06 PM)'Pckts' Wrote: "My minion"

Grow up Copters.
[img]images/smilies/dodgy.gif[/img]

@amnon 
Nobody is saying any weights. None of these claims are speaking about weights.
They are simply saying one tiger is the same size or larger than another. Something that is visible to the eye, usually. 2ndly, these are not just "photographers", lots work with the FD or the Location and provide the info you use.
So Vijay's opinion is meaningless because he is just a "photographer"?
Look at the contribution he has made in his short time, the great info provided on Ranthambhore tigers that we didnt know about. 
A local with first hand expierence will always have more knowledge than somebody on the outside looking in. In terms of size. 
You think you know how large a great white shark is because you see them on TV compared to somebody who swims with them?

So once again, nobody is talking about weights. Period!
We are talking about comparing sizes. 
Whether exactly correct or slightly off, Munna is quoted by many qualified eye witnesses as being the same size, larger or smaller than Pattewala and Naak Kata. 
That includes the Copters "friend" in which he quoted here.
So obviously there is nothing "overrated" about Munnas size. 
He is large, plain and simple. 

If you can't understand this, Im sorry. 

 

Still vague...

I don´t say that Munna is not a big tiger - I just say that without any DATA this topic has no sense.  

 

Do you not consider eye witness accounts from Naturalists and Forrest Officials who have seen tons of tigers, including munna, pattewala, Naak Kata and Red Eye, DATA?
Do you not take Corbett hunting accounts as data?
What about Valmik? Or Packer?

These people spend every waking minute with these cats, their words are for more reliable and definitely a form of Data, or evidence, if you're splitting hairs. But either way, they are definitely a usefull tip on finding out the true sizes and behavior of these cats. Reply

[Roflcopters]

I can't believe people took me serious with the 200kg claims, LOL [img]images/smilies/huh.gif[/img] I was just messing with Pckts to try and provoke him into busting his keyboard and i think i was successful in doing that. 

Good lord, spare me. [img]images/smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] Reply

[Pckts]

I'll take that as you admitting Munna is not overatted.
GG Copters [img]images/smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] Reply

[Amnon242]

(08-19-2014, 10:12 PM)Pckts Wrote:

(08-19-2014, 09:18 PM)'Bruinbark' Wrote:

(08-19-2014, 01:25 PM)'Amnon242' Wrote:

(08-19-2014, 09:41 AM)'Bruinbark' Wrote: Ajajajaja, pathetic what Rolfcopters turned in to. A lionsider with a vengeance for tigers. He should just accept that tigers, while not common, can, and will hit 250kg on a basis. Lions, never. Or you can show me the data.

 

omg

please, do not bring that tiger vs lion nonsense here...
  

 

Hey Genius Amnon, maybe if you read, you will see Rofl noted that South African lions are larger than Munna, so I gave him a taste back of his own medicine.

 

I will guarantee that copters doesn't really think south african lions are larger than munna.
He is just being stubborn because he was wrong in regards to Munnas size and refuses to admit it.
He has shown his lack of maturity on this forum, I have offered numerous accounts from extremely reliable people all showing and discussing his size, Copters doesn't have a leg to stand on here. He's wrong and knows it. That's why he resorts to calling me "Asad" or "Stupid"

Anyway, it's obvious that there is nothing "overrated" about Munna. He is/was one of the most massive tigers if not the most massive in Kahna. Kahna is the largest tiger reserve with the most tigers I believe, its obvious he is the upper class of tiger size for that area. Nothing can change all of the accounts of his size.
 

Bruinbark is somewhat confused :) . Rofl said nothing on tiger vs lion. He didn´t say that lions are bigger (or the same size). He used the lion (as the smaller cat) to demonstrate that Munna is rather small tiger - "Munna is small, even some lions are bigger than him". In fact Rofl indirectly said that lions are on average smaller than tigers. BTW we all know who is ROfl, he is certainly not a lion fan :)
  Reply

[Amnon242]

(08-19-2014, 10:19 PM)Pckts Wrote: Do you not consider eye witness accounts from Naturalists and Forrest Officials who have seen tons of tigers, including munna, pattewala, Naak Kata and Red Eye, DATA?

Exactly. Eye witness accounts are not data. :)

  Reply

[Amnon242]

(08-19-2014, 08:20 PM)GuateGojira Wrote: Finally, ANY post with the dirty name of "Asad" will be erased, that name don't deserve to be mentioned in this holy place anymore, that garbage still live in "Carnivora forum" and soon or late, I will crush him/her there too, like I have done many times in AVA.
 

I agree. Rofl was extremely rude to Pckts, he should apologize him :)

  Reply

[Roflcopters]

Quote:Bruinbark is somewhat confused . Rofl said nothing on tiger vs lion. He didn´t say that lions are bigger (or the same size). He used the lion (as the smaller cat) to demonstrate that Munna is rather small tiger - "Munna is small, even some lions are bigger than him". In fact Rofl indirectly said that lions are on average smaller than tigers. BTW we all know who is ROfl, he is certainly not a lion fan

this sums it up pretty nicely and as far as Munna's size goes.. he's still an average tiger compared to the likes of Wagdoh, Bamera, Jai, BMW from Pench and the list goes on. 

Quote:Exactly. Eye witness accounts are not data.

Simple logic that Pckts doesn't seem to understand, explains why i was messing with him for so long. 

Quote:I agree. Rofl was extremely rude to Pckts, he should apologize him

name calling happened on both sides [img]images/smilies/confused.gif[/img]


P.S not going to bother with all this anymore, waste of everybody's precious time as well as mine.
Adios
  Reply

[Amnon242]

(08-21-2014, 11:27 AM)Roflcopters Wrote: name calling happened on both sides [img]images/smilies/confused.gif[/img]

I meant that as a joke... :)


  Reply

[Roflcopters]

fair enough [img]images/smilies/tongue.gif[/img] Reply

[Pckts]

(08-21-2014, 11:27 AM)'Roflcopters' Wrote:

Quote:Bruinbark is somewhat confused . Rofl said nothing on tiger vs lion. He didn´t say that lions are bigger (or the same size). He used the lion (as the smaller cat) to demonstrate that Munna is rather small tiger - "Munna is small, even some lions are bigger than him". In fact Rofl indirectly said that lions are on average smaller than tigers. BTW we all know who is ROfl, he is certainly not a lion fan

this sums it up pretty nicely and as far as Munna's size goes.. he's still an average tiger compared to the likes of Wagdoh, Bamera, Jai, BMW from Pench and the list goes on. 

Quote:Exactly. Eye witness accounts are not data.

Simple logic that Pckts doesn't seem to understand, explains why i was messing with him for so long. 

Quote:I agree. Rofl was extremely rude to Pckts, he should apologize him

name calling happened on both sides [img]images/smilies/confused.gif[/img]


P.S not going to bother with all this anymore, waste of everybody's precious time as well as mine.
Adios
 

 

"this sums it up pretty nicely and as far as Munna's size goes.. he's still an average tiger compared to the likes of Wagdoh, Bamera, Jai, BMW from Pench and the list goes on"

Gotta love this, you've back it with 0 proof and have absolutely nothing that says any of them are larger or smaller than Munna, Patewala, Naak Kata and Red Eye.
Waghdoh is a maybe, no way bamera or BMW male is larger than any of the names mentioned above. No way, not from all the eye witness accounts.
Jai is a maybe but he is still young and his size is undetermined.

Copters, "P.S not going to bother with all this anymore, waste of everybody's precious time as well as mine."
You're the one who started this thread. You were proven wrong, end of story.

I'll be happy to end this debate right here and now. Reply

[Roflcopters]

Let's hug and do the ALS challenge Pckts. Reply

[Pckts]

Quote:Exactly. Eye witness accounts are not data.
Simple logic that Pckts doesn't seem to understand, explains why i was messing with him for so long. 

 

LOL, what DATA have you shown? What "logic" are you portraying?
Where is Waghoh's weight?
Where is Bamera's weight?
Where is Munna's weight?
What are the average tiger weights in Tadoba compared to Kahna?
You have no logic. There is a big difference, you are arguing to not be wrong. You have'nt shown a single shred of evidence to back anything you say.
While I have shown numerous eye witnesses all speaking of Munna's large size.
Compared to what I have shown, you have no leg to stand on.

I love that you try to act like you're devils advocate, but the only reason you resort to name calling is because you are not smart enough to rebuttal with actual data or proof or you simply don't have any.

Amnon-
You didn't answer my question,
Is what Valmik and Corbett say, not Data?
Have you never used anything they have said to prove a point or debate?
They are not numerical data, but they certainly are DATA.

Data means

1. facts and statistics collected together for reference or analysis.

   synonyms:

   FACTS, figures, statistics, DETAILS, particulars, specifics; Moreinformation, intelligence, material, input; informalinfo "a lack of data on the drug's side effects"

   • Computingthe quantities, characters, or symbols on which operations are performed by a computer, being stored and transmitted in the form of electrical signals and recorded on magnetic, optical, or mechanical recording media.
   • Philosophythings known or assumed as facts, making the basis of REASONING or calculation.
     
     This all applys, and DATA collected from numerous eye witnesses to come to a "assumed fact or Reasoning"
     When a tiger is observed for two months, and the tiger kills 2 bears in that time frame, the information taken from that is used as data for coming to a conclusion on how often tigers attack bears as predation. (just a example)
     
     
     You can call it "raw data" or even "Experimental Data""Data as an abstract concept can be viewed as the lowest level of abstraction, from which information and then knowledge are derived.Raw data, i.e., unprocessed data, refers to a collection of numbers, characters and is a relative term; data processing commonly occurs by stages, and the "processed data" from one stage may be considered the "raw data" of the next. Field data refers to raw data that is collected in an uncontrolled in situ environment. Experimental data refers to data that is generated within the context of a scientific investigation by observation and recording.The word "data" used to be considered as the plural of "datum", but now is generally used in the singular, as a mass noun.[sup][2][/sup]"
     

  Reply