WildFact
›
Information Section
›
Terrestrial Wild Animals
›
Wild Cats
›
Leopard
Persian Leopard (Panthera pardus saxicolor)
Persian Leopard (Panthera pardus saxicolor)
|
Persian Leopard (Panthera pardus saxicolor)
|
 (02-08-2022, 04:56 AM)Styx38 Wrote: would this mean that Persians may also have the highest number of max sized wild Leopards in the world? It seems so, for the moment. I checked several weights from Africa and Asia, and it seems that Iran leopards reach bigger masses in a regular basis than other populations.  (02-08-2022, 04:51 AM)Pckts Wrote: will never buy his alleged weight. He didn't look that size then or now, he was reported multiple weights as well as disregarded by both Mohammad and Kambiz and his total length was shorter than the larger Persians used that all weighed less than 90kg.You're free to believe it was not as I've also shown you in the size comparisons thread that it exactly was about the same size as that 94 kg Jaguar. Anyways the cat is confirmed by the email of the vet that Balam sent on modern weights and measurements of wild leopards. As much as it's confirmed on here  *This image is copyright of its original author Now if you find it too small at first sight to be 95 kg, what about this male? First. Guess estimate its weight.  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author Done? I bet you guessestimated 60 kg at best. Well guéss what for how small it looks It's weight is 85 kgs!  *This image is copyright of its original author So you see, a large frame is not always needed Animals of same species are never perfect clones of each other. It's pretty common that we see animals being at similar height or lengths and weight but some have longer fingers or larger feet or have larger skulls. Some animals are taller and more lanky while others carry more weight around. One example is that a Namibian leopard was 262 cm in TBL and an Indian one was about 261 cm in TBL. The same size? Not if I told you that the Namibian one weighed 96.5 kgs and the Indian one weighed 78 kgs, a negligible difference. Now regarding size comparison 85 kgs vs 95 kgz  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author Whether to me it does look fair. You may still disagree. It's your opinion I ain't going on debate with you. I do respect your opinion although I believe it's very clear how the 95 kg is reliable (02-08-2022, 05:34 AM)GuateGojira Wrote: It seems so, for the moment. I checked several weights from Africa and Asia, and it seems that Iran leopards reach bigger masses in a regular basis than other populationsIt's bad we lack data on Aberdare leopards isn't it. To me they are the only leopards that can rival if not even exceed the Persians in size. We have only two records from there, both hunting records that might be reliable and both are 90+ kg males. The 92.5 kg male hunted by Tony france and the estimated 90-100 kg male. Which is a very large individual so it's probably reliable. Maybe those areas produce huge males as regular as persian ones? Just two hunting records and we already have two males pushing between 90-100 kgs. We'll never know. But we can say they look impressive. This male below is dope.  *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 male has by far the largest and WIDEST skull I've ever seen on a live leopard (02-08-2022, 05:46 AM)LoveAnimals Wrote: It's bad we lack data on Aberdare leopards isn't it. To me they are the only leopards that can rival if not even exceed the Persians in size. It looks like a jaguar, honestly. Also leopards in the Congo area, where there are no lions, are also reputed to be of great size. Other population is that of Sri Lanka, but I don't remember specimens as massive as these males from Aberdares, Congo and Iran. Maybe other people may present information from other areas. I think that the difference is more about mass than body size. I checked all the sizes on the Indian leopards and I doubth that any big African or Iran leopard can surpass those lengths "between pegs". So is just about massiveness probably.  (02-08-2022, 05:22 AM)LoveAnimals Wrote:(02-08-2022, 04:51 AM)Pckts Wrote: Spot patterns look a bit off between the two *Look directly beneath eye and go down*Oh here it comes my favorite hobby. Identifying leopards based on spot pattern! Yes. They do compare. It's just that it's in different positions and the skin is stretched because of the collar in the first image and it's more floppy in the second one as there's no collar : (02-08-2022, 05:36 AM)LoveAnimals Wrote:(02-08-2022, 04:51 AM)Pckts Wrote: will never buy his alleged weight. He didn't look that size then or now, he was reported multiple weights as well as disregarded by both Mohammad and Kambiz and his total length was shorter than the larger Persians used that all weighed less than 90kg.You're free to believe it was not as I've also shown you in the size comparisons thread that it exactly was about the same size as that 94 kg Jaguar. (02-08-2022, 05:52 AM)GuateGojira Wrote:(02-08-2022, 05:46 AM)LoveAnimals Wrote: It's bad we lack data on Aberdare leopards isn't it. To me they are the only leopards that can rival if not even exceed the Persians in size. Indian leopards are very long yeah, and I don’t think I’ve ever seen a gorged looking Indian leopard or one with a large abdomen yet in weight studies they’re just as heavy as African leopards (on avg). Indian leopards have long bodies and broad heads just like Persian leopards, but you can tell the weight difference between two avg sized individuals would be due to the Persian leopard having a bulkier body and also due to Persian leopards being more well fed.  (02-08-2022, 02:31 AM)Pckts Wrote:(02-08-2022, 02:12 AM)Luipaard Wrote: @Pckts@guate Quote:No you cant, you have one cat at 91kg's and all others beneath that weight. What you can pretty much guarantee is that more often than not Leopards weighed from the north are going to be less than 90kg's and that's it. As far as I know, we have 5-6 male weights specifically from Northern Iran; 64kg (young male), 70kg (4 year old), 86kg, 88kg, 91kg and 95kg/115kg injured male. Then there was an exceptional male captured in northern country back in the 1960s. It's very likely the 90kg male reported by Harrington 1977 since back then there was no other data available:  *This image is copyright of its original author And of course they'll weigh less than 90kg more often than not. After all 90kg-100kg is basically the upper limit. However we're not talking about their specific maximum weight but about the frequency of such large males. It's a fact that they're the biggest in Northern Iran so it only increases the chance to reach said weights.
^^ that was pretty well explained. No one of course is trying to make 90+ kg leopards look more frequent than they truly are as everybody agrees that a 90-96 kg (estimating also 100+ kg males) leopard is going to be as freak as a 270+ kg Lion/Tiger, 150+ kg Jaguar and so on,therefore being rare.
The only initial statement was estimating the body size of those enormous northern males and to me when comparing their build to the so called 90-100+ cougars of Patagonia they look perfectly comparable, not to mention how massive and bulky they look at least visually when compared to a 80+ kg pusher male (Mawenzi) . So to me (and a lot of others from other platforms including Mammalia server, which is also filled with researchers and qualified people) estimating these animals to be between 90-100 kg is fair. Estimating them to be average is overrating how average leopards look like, truly. It would be like saying Waghdoh, Umarpani or Kingfisher are average sized Bengal tigers, or that Balam /Edno Jaguars are average Pantanal males (would love them to be average tho). We should also remember that the largest "reliably" leopard recorded is just 3.5 kg far from the 100 kg barrer, and it comes from a population that averages definitely less than Northern males in an era where leopards are endangered, considering that their numbers in some parts of Namibia are in a big decline because poaching and hunting is still barbarically legal there. So if we are still able to record 90+males from an endangered population well then imagine when their numbers were at top. You're all telling me that during the whole leopard historical reign, with the billions of individuals that have existed when their numbers were very high and not affected by human invasive impact no leopard was ever able to be at least 3+ kg heavier than that Namibian male? Considering there are subspecies that average much higher than Namibian leopards and that we have literally nothing about Aberdare leopards but only two records of two males that already push over 90 kgs? When looking at the material I guess anyone doubting the existence of 100+ kg leopard is rather uneducated or lacks commonsense logic. As much as people that doubt 160+ kg Pantanal Jaguars to have existed through their historical reign or even now but haven't been captured yet  (02-08-2022, 05:36 AM)LoveAnimals Wrote:(02-08-2022, 04:51 AM)Pckts Wrote: will never buy his alleged weight. He didn't look that size then or now, he was reported multiple weights as well as disregarded by both Mohammad and Kambiz and his total length was shorter than the larger Persians used that all weighed less than 90kg.You're free to believe it was not as I've also shown you in the size comparisons thread that it exactly was about the same size as that 94 kg Jaguar. You may not be aware but again this Leopard is now claimed to be 115kg again. And in no way does it compare to a 115kg Jaguar. Just to give you an idea, this is a 110kg Jaguar head  *This image is copyright of its original author and this is M15, 115kg Jaguar  *This image is copyright of its original author and this is Brutus who was 110kg during this first capture then 120kg a month later when full bellied  *This image is copyright of its original author There is a big difference between showing Mvumba at 85kg compared to this male right? Visual or not, Mvumba looks like a much smaller cat and in fact, he is. He's 55 lbs smaller than Brutus in each capture. This is generally the case with such differences, if we're splitting hairs and talking about a cat that's within a few kg's of the other, than of course it's not going to be obvious. Or if the positioning is different but when they are in fairly similar positions, it's going to stand out. And Mvumba being more densely than the Persian in question, is still more believable that he weighs the amount mentioned. He's also most likely full bellied and his true weight would be near the 70-75kg range, which is fine for his dimensions. That being said, we've debated the Persian until we're blue in the face, but I've seen enough big cats with verified measurements to in person and from Social Media to have a good sense of similarities in size when in certain positions compared to humans. And from my perspective, I don't buy it. Simple as that (02-08-2022, 10:55 PM)LoveAnimals Wrote: ^^ that was pretty well explained. No one of course is trying to make 90+ kg leopards look more frequent than they truly are as everybody agrees that a 90-96 kg (estimating also 100+ kg males) leopard is going to be as freak as a 270+ kg Lion/Tiger, 150+ kg Jaguar and so on,therefore being rare. Estimating those males to be 90-100kg without something to actually scale them off of is baseless. You just named Wagdoh and Uma for instance, two of the most photographed and viewed Tigers in modern times. We have tons of shots to scale them off of as well as eye witness testimonies and actually measured cats to compare them too where as those two Persian males you posted have single fleeting shots only. It's like using a camera trap shot of a single cat and claiming it as a record one. Not to mention one of the cats mentioned is already considered smaller than M3 which I didn't even know at the time when I said he was more impressive. Adding to the fact that he's been captured and said to be in the 70kg range, claiming them as 100kg cats which is larger than any Persian Leopard has ever weighed outside of the single debatable Persian seems to be an exaggeration. If your claim is that Persians can get to 100kg but it's extremely rare, that's fine, no one is debating that. But if your claim is that those two cats you showed are no doubt 90-100kg's based off a single fleeting image, that's a very different debate.
@Pckts
Quote:Not to mention one of the cats mentioned is already considered smaller than M3 which I didn't even know at the time when I said he was more impressive. Adding to the fact that he's been captured and said to be in the 70kg range You lost me here. Which male mentioned is considered smaller than Borna/M3? (02-09-2022, 01:06 AM)Luipaard Wrote: @Pckts The one with the Boar since he's from the same Location and M3 is the largest captured in the region. I probably misread in regards to M3 being larger than this male, I think you're probably speaking on M3 being the largest of the ones actually captured? Regardless, you guys are making way too many assumptions based off this video. I just watched it again and numerous issues occur. For one, he's being filmed from 100s of meters away, he's being zoomed in on just to get a good glimpse Trying to make an assertion that this male is somehow larger than the ones actually captured based off of this video is impossible especially since his muscle composition isn't anything special in comparison. Also, you asked how M3 would be less than M4 if M3's body dimensions are larger? There are numerous ways, shoulder height differences which of course isn't specified, chest girth, limb and neck girth as well as food content. Of course since none of those are described there is no way to know, all we can go off of is the mention of his weight by the capturing facility. This of course is the same issue seen in any big cat, and it's why the longest cat isn't always the heaviest. (02-09-2022, 01:49 AM)Pckts Wrote:(02-09-2022, 01:06 AM)Luipaard Wrote: @Pckts Quote:The one with the Boar since he's from the same Location and M3 is the largest captured in the region. I probably misread in regards to M3 being larger than this male, I think you're probably speaking on M3 being the largest of the ones actually captured? As I've stated before, yes the wild boar killer and M1, M2, M3 and M4 all originate from Tandoureh National Park, which lies in Northeastern Iran. I never said M3 is larger than this male. The same source that said he was at least 70kg claimed him to be the biggest leopard they captured: Quote:He was the largest leopard we investigated there and was famous among visitors to the park due to the stunning pictures so many were able to take of him. Link: http://future4leopards.org/borna-found-dead/ The biggest one they captured on paper was M4 weighing in at 75kg which means M3 weighed more than 75kg. This is very likely M4: IMO, M3 looks bigger and bulkier: Quote:Regardless, you guys are making way too many assumptions based off this video. I just watched it again and numerous issues occur. For one, he's being filmed from 100s of meters away, he's being zoomed in on just to get a good glimpse In the video you see a wild boar kill. You can't tell if it's devoured or not because like you said they zoomed in from a distance. So we're not allowed to guesstimate the leopard's size because of him being zoomed it but at the same time you can conclude the carcass is devoured? That's not fair. Quote:Trying to make an assertion that this male is somehow larger than the ones actually captured based off of this video is impossible especially since his muscle composition isn't anything special in comparison. You've said that before yes, them being not anything special. Still you're part of a minority since everyone agrees that the wild boar killer male is massive including the person who decided to upload the video (i.e. the title of the video). And no, I don't believe it's the biggest leopard in the world. But him being a large male? I think there's no debate about this. Again, the wild boar gives some perspective given the fact that wild boars in Iran are quite large and it's clearly an adult, not a piglet. Even if you believe it's devoured, the front side is never consumed and it clearly appears intact. Quote:Also, you asked how M3 would be less than M4 if M3's body dimensions are larger? There are numerous ways, shoulder height differences which of course isn't specified, chest girth, limb and neck girth as well as food content. Of course since none of those are described there is no way to know, all we can go off of is the mention of his weight by the capturing facility. This of course is the same issue seen in any big cat, and it's why the longest cat isn't always the heaviest. I only said M3 was longer despite being younger. The main reason why M3 is bigger is simply because they stated him to be the largest they investigated as I've shown twice already. M3 was never weighed hence why they were conservative by saying at least 70kg. Yet they were sure about him being the largest so this puts him above M4 the 75kg male. You're the ony who thinks he's (was since he's dead) actually 70kg exact. (02-09-2022, 01:49 AM)Pckts Wrote:You might be right, but I don’t think borna was ever weighed, his weight may have only been estimated. Here is the 75kg male btw. I guess it kind of resembles the male leopard in that video but we can’t be sure unless we see matching spot patterns and I definitely have seen other tandoureh male leopards that look similar.(02-09-2022, 01:06 AM)Luipaard Wrote: @Pckts  *This image is copyright of its original author
@Pckts
Here you're just twisting words to this point or simply putting in my mouth words I've never ever said which is no offense but a bit of hilarious from an experienced poster (way more experienced) than me on animal forum community. (02-08-2022, 11:24 PM)Pckts Wrote: You may not be aware but again this Leopard is now claimed to be 115kg again. This is a very good bruh moment First of all, why are you changing randomly topic switching from the leooard being 95 kg to some random claims of 115 kg? And why are you mentioning the fact that this leopard is now again being estimated to be 115 kg to ME who I'm the one that never claimed nor believed it to be of that size but 20 kg lighter? When did I ever estimate the leopard to be 115 kg? Show me, because I could take you 100+ Screenshots when I've been only saying 95 kg, not even one time 115 kg. I'm mentioning it to be around 95 kg since two days, not even 1 single time I've ever estimated it to be 115 kg. Why are you changing topic switching to 115 kg? You're aware that I'm more than capable to prove it is 95 kg so you decide to change topic? Not good. Or maybe you confused me with Luipaard that said "95/115 kg" because he does still believe in that size? Fine. You mistook me for him, because I've never believed in the 115 kg weight as I'm also one of the few that keep mentioning that in Carnivora how that leopard lacks the bauplan and frame size to attain such huge weight on an empty stomach. FYI, other proof I'm never claiming that Tom to be 115 kg :  *This image is copyright of its original author So do not insinuate the estimates or claims made by others, keep your concentration focused on our messages and on our conversation which aims to prove that the weight of 95 kg is reliable. I do not want to hear 115 kg mentioned one more time when you talk to me about that single persian male, as I've never mentioned it and you pulled it out at random. We are talking about 95 kg. Is that clear? I don't wanna sound aggressive nor salty but tbh I enormously hate when people that are talking to me either put in my mouth estimates I've never said nor believed such as that the leopard is 115 kg, making the discussion longer than it should have been with me who has to repeat again the same points. I hope you get this don't you? Now, talking about the alleged 95 kg male, you likely insist on saying how that animal doesn't look at all to be 90+ kgs from that perspective angle, whereas on the size comparisons thread I've compared a 94 kg Jaguar to him that was lying next to people in a similar distance and that has shown they are perfectly of the same exact size. Now, you posted pictures of 105-110+ kg Jaguars but that's because you wrongly thought I was claiming the leopard to be in the 110+ kg benchmark. Thing I wasn't, as I've CLEARLY stated it by mentioning that I compared it to a 94 kg jaguar. So I don't even know what made you believe that I like was stating "oh that leopard is 115 kg I've compared it to a jaguar and it looks 115 kg". Again, no. Don't ever mention 115 kg. My original comparison was made to this male here, sadly ran over by a truck, that weighed 94 kgs  *This image is copyright of its original author Compare it to the 95 kg Persian in a similar position, close to humans.  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author That DOES compare. The jaguar ain't dwarfing the cat as it would with a 70 kg leopard. Anyone with eyes and the capability of comparing sizes or at least some additional education will confirm that. Because both cats are in a similar position. Of course if the leopard is stretched on the table on a flattering angle it will look smaller in frame. Same would with a jaguar Now, let's go on with the comparison by comparing Jaguars of a similar size to this leopard. Here Karol female, almost 92 kgs  *This image is copyright of its original author Compared to the leopard.  *This image is copyright of its original author They are comparable Now 95 kg teorema the beast, on this angle with a man next to her.  *This image is copyright of its original author Compared to the leopard  *This image is copyright of its original author They are comparable Now let's go to a larger jaguar, which is 100 kg empty and is theoretically 5 kg larger than the leopard, which isn't a huge difference, they would almost look identical in size. This is the image with the legs and feet of the man standing close to it (I marked the feet birders so you can see them easier)  *This image is copyright of its original author Compared to the leopard.  *This image is copyright of its original author They ARE comparable. Now regarding who believes it or who doesn't. Here the official persian leopard project page, made up by several researchers and vets that confirms the weight.  *This image is copyright of its original author Here Mohammad Farhadinia, debunking the idea of the 115 kg leopard and saying the original report was 95 kg.  *This image is copyright of its original author Here is Kaveh Hatami who also works for Persian leopards conservation also confirming that weight  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author you have the vets that were present there who confirm that after weighing the cat of course I think @ So now? Do you have again any doubts regarding the leopard to be around 95 kg? I guess yes, years pass but you're so solid to your own idea despite all the massive evidence telling you're wrong in doubting that (vets and researchers of the project confirming the weight for you is dubious, yet you trust some visual estimates of a leopard being at least 70 kg whereas it wasn't even weighed? If yes, you're being biased to the whole level of Carnivora fanboys to this point) but so I can't do anything to convince you more than this. Although you can't get a better evidence than this and that anyone who is educated in size comparisons can see how the leopard compared to the other 91-95 kg Jaguars. So either the comparison of who believes in it and who doesn't is just "you vs everyone" well, I can't do much if you can't accept that. Fact is that the leopard DOES weigh 95 kg. End of story. Nothing dubious. If you're ever about to talk about that persian male and have to mention that its weight is dubious, specify that it is dubious just for you. Because you're the only one doubting it and all the other evidence tells you it's reliable. Even @Balam told me it's likely to be real when I used the 90+ kg Jaguar comparisons. Messages of today.  *This image is copyright of its original author And for your information you do know that Balam is not someone who does overestimates regarding cats, rather, she's very cautious and is sometimes even skeptical when she's told the weights of very heavy leopards that approach the 90-100 kg mark, to not count the numerous times she dealed with unreliable records on Carnivora. So even she's telling you she finds it reliable, you're the black sheep of the white herd. Aka you're the only one who is doubting it. Time to put an end to this, because it's becoming an annoying debate, this of the 95 kg male being so obsessively dubious for you. You should rather be impressed that in recent times another 90+ kg male not far from 100 kg was recorded, as Iranian leopards are like only 550-800 similar to Siberian tigers in numbers (and therefore endangered) but still capable of producing very large specimens close to the 100 kg benchmark. Not even 1 time I've claimed it to be 115 kg, as it lacks totally the frame to be that heavy on an empty stomach. Isn't that also what you think? Then we totally agree So at this point I'll let you believe the leopard to not be 95 kg in peace. I've said what I said, this conversation is over. (02-08-2022, 11:24 PM)Pckts Wrote: There is a big difference between showing Mvumba at 85kg compared to this male right? Visual or not, Mvumba looks like a much smaller cat and in fact, he is. He's 55 lbs smaller than Brutus in each capture.Again this part makes no sense and is totally off because you're mentioning that the leooard being 85 kg is much smaller than a 110-120 kg jaguar, which is true. But what is inaccurate about this claim? It's that you're using that to disprove the fact persian leopard is the same size as a 110-120 kg Jaguar because again you popped out this 115 kg thing from nowhere as I was never claiming it to be 115 kg. For God's sake. Why did I compare 85 kg Mvumba to the persian? To show you that not all leopards need to look large to weigh a lot. And they look exalcty of the same size, the persian is a little stockier. And guess how much it weighed? 95 kg! As it's perfectly comparable to 85 kg. Again, you're still assuming I'm claiming the leopard to be 115 kg. Which I'm not!! You look like you're struggling in this debate so that you randomly change topic or twist words, mentioning things that were never mentioned like the leopard being 115 kg. Again, you mistook me for Luipaard. (02-08-2022, 11:32 PM)Pckts Wrote: If your claim is that Persians can get to 100kg but it's extremely rare, that's fine, no one is debating that Lastly, This part is perfectly correct. You have perfectly summarized what I thought by briefly summarizing my claim in a few words. Totally right and fine. Isn't it? Perfecto. (02-08-2022, 11:32 PM)Pckts Wrote: Not to mention one of the cats mentioned is already considered smaller than M3 which I didn't even know at the time when I said he was more impressive. Source that one of those cats that I mentioned is considered smaller whereas both are unknown males with only a single footage for both? Share me evidence of an expert saying in a message that one of those giant males I've posted is considered to be smaller of again M3 that is estimated to be 70 kg as a lowest estimate, show me physical evidence of someone claiming that male to be smaller than 70+++ kg M3. Otherwise it's just a claim based on thin air that you could have invented in that moment when you were replying to me. And still, "thought" to be smaller is just a visual estimate and most of visual estimates are off, like you claiming that leopard to look normal whereas there's sheer evidence of it being 95 kg. "full belly, it's likely that Mvumba weighed less at about 70-75 kg" Another claim based on thin air? Before you estimate Vin Diesel to be full belly in images in his prime where he looks massive (but you prefer showing pictures of him past his prime, don't you?) then you even doubt Mvumba weight whereas the original source doesn't share any evidence of the leopard being gorged? Looks like that when a huge 80+ kg leopard pops out you immediately mention that it was likely gorged, although there's no evidence for it and you're just guess estimating it. (02-08-2022, 11:32 PM)Pckts Wrote: But if your claim is that those two cats you showed are no doubt 90-100kg's based off a single fleeting image, that's a very different debate. But that ruined the whole thing again. When did I ever say that those males are 100% 90-100+ kg and that everyone has to believe me? From what I see, I have repeated several times that it is only my estimate and my opinion, not a fact. Sometimes I think that I should mark my "in my opinion" or simply my "IMO" in bold letters or am I wrong? Because it seems like people really either can't see them or maybe there's a bug on my phone that makes me see that I wrote it when I didn't actually write it.  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author Am I the only one who is seeing them? The next time I guess I'll put a 4k HD giant image with the letters " IN MY OPINION" so that no-one misread again. Joking aside, I'm obviously not the only one who considers these specimens to be freak specimens, ironically you are the first of many (and no I don't ask for opinions from leopard fans, I do it to people who are unbiased like some people, sometimes researchers, Mammalian users or other animal forums) to say that they are nothing special to you. But still, you said FOR YOU. So this is also your single opinion so we're just talking about estimates. But again, you say I can't properly estimate the size of a leopard based on no reference nor scaling. ^That's totally true and I do 100% agree with you on this, but as I've always said that's just my opinion (approved by a lot-, but it's just speculating so I don't even consider how many people agree how those are no ordinary common leopards) and I've never said that as a sheer fact. This is just opinions vs opinions right? Now, what's interesting is how you changed the way to approach my personal estimate of these males. First you say they look nothing exceptional for you, and pull out that male that was estimated to be again at least 70 kg, not "around 70 kg" or in the "70 kg range" as you just wrote in your last message today modifying the words so that it would look more in your favor. Because no, around 70 kg or in the 70 kg range means that it was close to the 70 kg benchmark.,whereas at least 70 kg means that 70 kg is the lowest estimate and that it can be even higher. They are not the same things. People say at least when they wanna make an estimate that is undoubtedly nothing less than that weigh (in this case, 70 kg) but that it can be even larger. So again, this male was never weighed and you can't use that guess lowest estimate for the animal as a proof that those males fall in the same mark as it. Because that male wasn't weighed. And again if you're using that 70 kg (lowest) estimate as a proof then you can't deny the claims of Vin Diesel to be 80-90+ kg, rather than posting images of him when he's far past his prime and claiming him to be gorged in the images where he looks massive and chocky (which is exactly when they allegedly weighed him because they removed its collar but again I'm not stating this is verified, it's not.) thing you have no evidence for it to be. Back to the original topic, you said I can't reliably estimate them to be that size. Of course I can't and I do not spread that as sheer fact, as I repeated billions of times it's just my opinion. And I've already told you I perfectly agree on this. Don't we agree on this? But as much as my opinion of them to be well over 90 kg is just my opinion that can't be confirmed, so is yours of them not being impressive. So at the end we are just "punto e a capo" As we say in Italian, which means "we always end to the same point". That it's just opinions. I still think is pretty of a fact that the males look too impressive to be average sized, but oh well. Again that's just my opinion. (02-09-2022, 02:27 AM)Twico5 Wrote: guess it kind of resembles the male leopard in that video but we can’t be sure unless we see matching spot patterns and I definitely have seen other tandoureh male leopards that look similarI've compared their spot pattern and no, the giant male in the video with the boar and the 75 kg male aren't the same animal Offhand -  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author 75 kg male : I've identified an enormous rosette on its back, which has on the left two smaller rosettes that are literally close to it. Near the belly, close to the hind limbs there's a big dot, not a rosette. Like a cheetah dot. And to our left, near the dot there are two rosettes.  *This image is copyright of its original author Video male He completely lacks the cheetah like dot and those small rosettes close to it. There is a huge rosette on its waist, but it isn't as close to the shoulders as that of the 75 kg male and it looks completely different. To note that from right to left after the big rosette there's immediately another large rosette, whereas in the 75 kg male after the big rosette there were two very small ones  *This image is copyright of its original author We are 100% confirmed that the male in the video is not the 75 kg . I'm unmatched in identifying leopards with this method and if I tell you that's not the same male, it's not. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 2 Guest(s) |