There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
02-09-2022, 11:25 AM( This post was last modified: 02-09-2022, 08:08 PM by AndresVida )
The build of an 88 kg male
*This image is copyright of its original author
Compared to the male claimed to be nothing special
*This image is copyright of its original author
Now I think I'm speaking to flatearthers to this point if they are keeping pushing it to be an average sized male
Of course the weight estimate is speculating and nothing confirmed that should be taken just as opinions.
Totally true, no one can make a reliable estimate without the chonker being weighed. But still, saying this dude is average sized means grossly overrating how average sized animals look like. But again, my take
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.
And in no way does it compare to a 115kg Jaguar.
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 @Luipaard has the voice message of the vets that said the leopard weighed about 95 kg after a day or two, meaning that the wrong claim of 115 kg could have been also the result of the leopard gorging on a bait for the vets to sedate and capture it. But that's just speculating.
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.
You're late to the conversation, both Luippard and I have verbal confirmation claimed from Iman Memarian that the Leopard allegedly weighed 115kg.
He sent both of us verbal IG messages. Luippard will back that claim.
So that being said, do you still believe he matches up to a 115Kg Jaguar?
(02-09-2022, 11:25 AM)LoveAnimals Wrote: The build of an 88 kg male
*This image is copyright of its original author
Compared to the male claimed to be nothing special
*This image is copyright of its original author
Now I think I'm speaking to flatearthers to this point if they are keeping pushing it to be an average sized male
Keep your childish insults to yourself. Instead of getting defensive and attacking, try having a discussion.
Back to your claim, once again showing a single shot of a Leopard still 100s of meters away from the camera man compared to a confirmed 88kg dead leopard carcass on the floor with humans to scale proves what exactly?
The fact that you can't see the absurdity in that is sad.
(02-09-2022, 11:23 PM)Pckts Wrote: You're late to the conversation, both Luippard and I have verbal confirmation claimed from Iman Memarian that the Leopard allegedly weighed 115kg.
He sent both of us verbal IG messages. Luippard will back that claim.
"Verbal" confirmation is not as reliable as visual confirmation. Anyone could send a voice. message claiming an animal to be of a certain size but until I don't see a cat being weighed on a scale, with the scale itself showing the 115 kg weight mark I'm never going to buy that size. Not to note that there are various researchers from the persian leopard project that confirm the 95 kg weight, as Mohammad also said the original report tried to misreport them. Isn't that already enough?
I guess yes, you can easily discard that weight as Balam already said on Modern Weights and measurements of wild leopards. I don't know why you people are giving so much attention to this voice message whereas there is multiple evidence telling the weight was at best the result of the leopard having stomach content for the bait?
Can you please give me the Instagram of Imam? I really want to try a discussion with him.
(02-09-2022, 11:23 PM)Pckts Wrote: So that being said, do you still believe he matches up to a 115Kg Jaguar?
No never on earth, as I already said to me the 115 kg weight is way off, especially when the cat in question doesn't even look to be of the claimed size.
If that leopard looked of a frame of this kind I might have believed in it :
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
But it doesn't. As I've already shown you, it's frame is comparable to a 90-95 kg jaguar.
So you can definitely discard the 115 kg weight and just stick to the only likely one that is 95 kg. I don't know hey you guys are giving too much attention to the voice messages.
That's not a 110+ kg leopard you can be sure.
But still may you please give to me the Instagram tag of Imam? On DM maybe? I'm curious to see what he will share to me after I ask him of the weight
02-10-2022, 01:49 AM( This post was last modified: 02-10-2022, 01:52 AM by AndresVida )
(02-09-2022, 11:27 PM)Pckts Wrote: Keep your childish insults to yourself. Instead of getting defensive and attacking, try having a discussion.
Back to your claim, once again showing a single shot of a Leopard still 100s of meters away from the camera man compared to a confirmed 88kg dead leopard carcass on the floor with humans to scale proves what exactly?
The fact that you can't see the absurdity in that is sad.
And please spare the drama, looking for a discussion is always what I do and what I get but as I said I hate contradictions. As long as they are opinions and are used as opinions (and not sheer facts) as I did, stressing several times that it was just my claim, that's fine. We all agree, don't we?
I respect your opinion 100% because tolerance is the basic key of any debate, but as I have already told you it is not about defense or attacks, it is about recalling the contradiction.
As long as you tell me that for you in your opinion they are not impressive specimens well, I disagree but it is your opinion and I respect it 100%. Anyone who has been in a debate with me knows I do respect opinions if they are treated as opinions and not as facts (reason why I always hate when people don't notice when I write "in my opinion")
But in the moment you tell me that for you they are not exceptional leopards by using as method a comparison to a specimen that has never been weighed but only estimated to be at least 70 kg (but you have modified the message by saying "around 70 kg", which is not the same as "at least" since they are two totally different meanings because "around 70 kg" means "about 70 kg or maybe a bit less" while "at least" means that 70 kg is the minimum weight that can be estimated for the leopard)
but then come and criticize me for comparing him to another male (unlike yours, mine was weighed at 88 kg, not estimated, but officially weighed), you can't expect me to not call you out for this don't you?
So not only you compare a male who has never been weighed in his life, but do you even change the meaning of the sentence in the report?
Now if my claim is inaccurate (never said it was reliable, for the 100th time it's just my estimate) how's yours? Nothing more reliable than mine.
Also the fact that the leopard was filmed from a very far distance it doesn't alter the quality of the footage. You can clearly see how heavily built he is, with a compact downward build and a fairly deep torso and head that gives a pinhead effect in comparison to body size. Some even mistook it to be a pregnant female when I posted this on imgur. Do you think an average sized leopard would have such built?
Of course I can't estimate reliably his body mass, but again that still looks too impressively built to just be an average sized male.
I respect your take, but you should also consider mine. We are good aren't we?
(02-09-2022, 11:23 PM)Pckts Wrote: You're late to the conversation, both Luippard and I have verbal confirmation claimed from Iman Memarian that the Leopard allegedly weighed 115kg.
He sent both of us verbal IG messages. Luippard will back that claim.
"Verbal" confirmation is not as reliable as visual confirmation. Anyone could send a voice. message claiming an animal to be of a certain size but until I don't see a cat being weighed on a scale, with the scale itself showing the 115 kg weight mark I'm never going to buy that size. Not to note that there are various researchers from the persian leopard project that confirm the 95 kg weight, as Mohammad also said the original report tried to misreport them. Isn't that already enough?
I guess yes, you can easily discard that weight as Balam already said on Modern Weights and measurements of wild leopards. I don't know why you people are giving so much attention to this voice message whereas there is multiple evidence telling the weight was at best the result of the leopard having stomach content for the bait?
Can you please give me the Instagram of Imam? I really want to try a discussion with him.
(02-09-2022, 11:23 PM)Pckts Wrote: So that being said, do you still believe he matches up to a 115Kg Jaguar?
No never on earth, as I already said to me the 115 kg weight is way off, especially when the cat in question doesn't even look to be of the claimed size.
If that leopard looked of a frame of this kind I might have believed in it :
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
But it doesn't. As I've already shown you, it's frame is comparable to a 90-95 kg jaguar.
So you can definitely discard the 115 kg weight and just stick to the only likely one that is 95 kg. I don't know hey you guys are giving too much attention to the voice messages.
That's not a 110+ kg leopard you can be sure.
But still may you please give to me the Instagram tag of Imam? On DM maybe? I'm curious to see what he will share to me after I ask him of the weight
Iman Memarian is the vet allegedly involved with the capture and weighing of the cat. He's adamant the Leopard was 115kg.
Mohammad and Iman had nothing to do with the capture or weighing of the cat and that study is all 2nd hand sources which again is a problem. But ask either of them if what Iman said is true, they'll back Iman I'm sure.
Iman's instagram is his name, you'll easily find it.
Quote:No never on earth, as I already said to me the 115 kg weight is way off, especially when the cat in question doesn't even look to be of the claimed size.
Good, I'll make sure to hold you to this.
Quote:If that leopard looked of a frame of this kind I might have believed in it :
There are no Leopard's on earth that compare to Jaguars shown.
02-10-2022, 02:08 AM( This post was last modified: 02-10-2022, 02:09 AM by Pckts )
(02-10-2022, 01:49 AM)LoveAnimals Wrote:
(02-09-2022, 11:27 PM)Pckts Wrote: Keep your childish insults to yourself. Instead of getting defensive and attacking, try having a discussion.
Back to your claim, once again showing a single shot of a Leopard still 100s of meters away from the camera man compared to a confirmed 88kg dead leopard carcass on the floor with humans to scale proves what exactly?
The fact that you can't see the absurdity in that is sad.
And please spare the drama, looking for a discussion is always what I do and what I get but as I said I hate contradictions. As long as they are opinions and are used as opinions (and not sheer facts) as I did, stressing several times that it was just my claim, that's fine. We all agree, don't we?
I respect your opinion 100% because tolerance is the basic key of any debate, but as I have already told you it is not about defense or attacks, it is about recalling the contradiction.
As long as you tell me that for you in your opinion they are not impressive specimens well, I disagree but it is your opinion and I respect it 100%. Anyone who has been in a debate with me knows I do respect opinions if they are treated as opinions and not as facts (reason why I always hate when people don't notice when I write "in my opinion")
But in the moment you tell me that for you they are not exceptional leopards by using as method a comparison to a specimen that has never been weighed but only estimated to be at least 70 kg (but you have modified the message by saying "around 70 kg", which is not the same as "at least" since they are two totally different meanings because "around 70 kg" means "about 70 kg or maybe a bit less" while "at least" means that 70 kg is the minimum weight that can be estimated for the leopard)
but then come and criticize me for comparing him to another male (unlike yours, mine was weighed at 88 kg, not estimated, but officially weighed), you can't expect me to not call you out for this don't you?
So not only you compare a male who has never been weighed in his life, but do you even change the meaning of the sentence in the report?
Now if my claim is inaccurate (never said it was reliable, for the 100th time it's just my estimate) how's yours? Nothing more reliable than mine.
Also the fact that the leopard was filmed from a very far distance it doesn't alter the quality of the footage. You can clearly see how heavily built he is, with a compact downward build and a fairly deep torso and head that gives a pinhead effect in comparison to body size. Some even mistook it to be a pregnant female when I posted this on imgur. Do you think an average sized leopard would have such built?
Of course I can't estimate reliably his body mass, but again that still looks too impressively built to just be an average sized male.
I respect your take, but you should also consider mine. We are good aren't we?
The specimen I compared to has been captured, measured and was one of multiples who were weighed. And of course the capturing team states him as "at least 70kg's" and from the same exact location as the other mentioned. Next is the fact that the 88kg one is dead, in rigor mortis as well as being in close proximity to humans while the one I posted and said was more impressive than the ones you posted is in a similar position to the alleged monster Leopard you claim and most importantly, it's alive. So when you claim this
Quote:I guess that these could be some real 100+ kg leopards.
then ask me what I think and I provide my opinion that they aren't anything special while providing another cat who's considered quite large yet quoted to be "at least 70kgs" and cast doubt on the males you posted being 100kg's, don't get defensively and make backhanded remarks about "flat earthers" or some other personal attack.
02-10-2022, 02:09 AM( This post was last modified: 02-10-2022, 02:11 AM by AndresVida )
(02-10-2022, 01:59 AM)Pckts Wrote: He's adamant the Leopard was 115kg.
Mohammad and Iman had nothing to do with the capture or weighing of the cat and that study is all 2nd hand sources which again is a problem. But ask either of them if what Iman said is true, they'll back Iman I'm sure.
I will text them.
For Imam, I will also show him the jaguar comparisons (if you didn't do that already) to make him see how uncomparable that leopard looks to a confirmed 110+ kg jaguar, now I am really curious to see how he will react to that. Maybe he will leave my message on read and never answer because he sees a very sheer fact of how that leopard doesn't clearly look to be 115kg?
We will see. And of course I will share his answer as he replies
(02-10-2022, 01:59 AM)Pckts Wrote: There are no Leopard's on earth that compare to Jaguars shown.
In fact, the largest reliably leopards compare at best to the 90-95 kg Jaguars I've shown that's why I instead buy the 95 kg weight and 100% discard and debunk the 115 kg one.
But even then, I'm 100% sure that me trying to text Imam will have as conclusion nothing new, either another voice message or marking my message as "read". But again, who knows, I'll try a conversation
(02-10-2022, 01:59 AM)Pckts Wrote: He's adamant the Leopard was 115kg.
Mohammad and Iman had nothing to do with the capture or weighing of the cat and that study is all 2nd hand sources which again is a problem. But ask either of them if what Iman said is true, they'll back Iman I'm sure.
I will text them.
For Imam, I will also show him the jaguar comparisons (if you didn't do that already) to make him see how uncomparable that leopard looks to a confirmed 110+ kg jaguar, now I am really curious to see how he will react to that. Maybe he will leave my message on read and never answer because he sees a very sheer fact of how that leopard doesn't clearly look to be 115kg?
We will see. And of course I will share his answer as he replies
(02-10-2022, 01:59 AM)Pckts Wrote: There are no Leopard's on earth that compare to Jaguars shown.
In fact, the largest reliably leopards compare at best to the 90-95 kg Jaguars I've shown that's why I instead buy the 95 kg weight and 100% discard and debunk the 115 kg one.
But even then, I'm 100% sure that me trying to text Imam will have as conclusion nothing newxeither another voice message or marking my message as "read". But again, who knows, I'll try a conversation
I haven't done so, he's a nice guy so I didn't want to call him out on the claims. But feel free, like I said, no matter what he says, there is absolutely no way I believe that cat is 115kg especially with a smaller TL than the 75kg M4.
I also don't think any Leopards you posted compare to the Jaguars you posted at 90-95kg's.
The limb and body girth are visible very different.
02-10-2022, 02:39 AM( This post was last modified: 02-10-2022, 02:30 PM by AndresVida )
(02-10-2022, 02:08 AM)Pckts Wrote: don't get defensively and make backhanded remarks about "flat earthers" or some other personal attack
The personal attacks were not real personal attacks, more than anything else if I started to act in this way it is for two reasons, one in particular
1) I thought you were accusing me at random of having estimated the leopard to be 115 kg because you did not mention Imam in the first message so consequently I thought you were referring to me. And so you understand that after I think I was accused of saying the exact opposite of what I have been repeating for two days I got a little nervous? Never mind it was a misunderstanding.
It all ended when you made it clear to me that you were referring to Imam, but you should have mentioned it earlier because it seemed like an accusation, at least from my point of view.
2) the fact that you said that I think those leopards are undoubtedly 90-100 kg. This was that other thing that made me nervous, because as I showed you in the Screenshots I said at least 5 times that it was my opinion.
These are the only reasons why i got salty. Nothing more. The way I judged your method of estimating the animals to be nothing special wasn't based on personal attacks. As I said, different opinions. For how much I can disagree I have to respect them and give the reasons why I don't buy such estimate. Now my estimate is based on the build of the cat, which is absolutely massive and chocky, too chonky for me to consider the cat of an average size.
What do I think of your estimate? That you would be totally right if the cat was weighed at 70 kg. Thing it wasn't. They captured males and weighed some of them, which I think the 75 kg one was among them. They didn't weigh this animal, they compared probably to the others they have weighed and as you said they claimed it to be the biggest they captured, and estimating it to be "at least" 70 kg. Now as a lowest estimate, it's already almost as large as the 75 kg one. But they considered it to be the largest captured, hence why they said "at least 70 kg", meaning it could have gone far from that weight.
The reason I also got a bit salty is because you changed the "at least" to "around". That changes completely the sense of the phrase.
If they estimated it to be around 70 kg, which means like 65-69 kg (as around 100 kg means 95-97 kg), it wouldn't make sense for them to consider it to be the largest male. "at least" because it does consider the possibility that this male could have weighed well over 70 kg, who knows perhaps even more than 80 kg that's why they said "at least".
Not to note, you keep mentioning that they estimate the at least 70 kg male to be more impressive than mine but yet you show no proof of them claiming that.
Also to note, you have been a bit contradictory to what you said because.
The original statement you wrote is that they stated the leopard to be the largest they have captured. Not the largest in the whole Tandoureh Park range, as I'm aware they never captured the monster male I was talking about so that comparison is just made to captured males.
In the same sample of the captured males where the "at least 70 kg male" sits there there's also a 75 kg male. So now you see that if they consider this male to be the heaviest and largest they captured it would be automatically be larger in weight than the 75 kg male, hence why stating that they claimed it to be "just 70 kg" whereas 70 kg is the minimum weight given is a completely wrong way to interpretate such claim.
And even if they don't consider him as the largest male captured, "at least" means that's still the lowest estimate. What you did was take that post and use it as if it had simply estimated the feline at 70kg or even slightly less (because around 70 kg doesn't mean necessarily 70 kg, might be a little lower) and that was it, when in reality it estimated that at least it weighs 70kg and that it could weigh a lot more.
You understand my intent now.? I don't attack and never unusual any random, that had been a misunderstanding.
And also I just didn't tollerate how you used a claim and twisted its words by changing the sense of it to make a point. And I'm not even the first one who tells you such about this "at least 70 kg male".
I'm sure even Mojave in a jaguar-leopard thread in CF told you that "at least 70 kg" means it can weigh much more, hence it wouldn't make sense for the researchers to consider it as the largest male captured if they stated it to be just 70 kg whereas there's a 75 kg male in the sample.
Don't you think?
But overall I'm glad you got that it was a misunderstanding, as I wrongly thought you were accusing me of estimating the 95 kg Persian to be 115 kg.
02-10-2022, 02:43 AM( This post was last modified: 02-10-2022, 02:47 AM by AndresVida )
(02-10-2022, 02:15 AM)Pckts Wrote: I also don't think any Leopards you posted compare to the Jaguars you posted at 90-95kg's.
You said that well in mentioning that you think they don't compare as even Balam said they do compare. I'm fact, she also buys that weight. But oh well it's just your own opinion and I respect it. I'll let you stick to it despite there's evidence saying the opposite
(02-10-2022, 02:15 AM)Pckts Wrote: I haven't done so, he's a nice guy so I didn't want to call him out on the claims. But feel free,
Umm now i think i would be too invasive in doing that.. Maybe I will think about it. Well I do dream of a leopard of being of that size as a leopard enthusiast, and we all do agree that leopards reaching or exceeding 100 kgs in a similar way to cougars historically or even now is possible.
We just don't buy that leopard to ve of that size. And I do agree. That leopard is nothing close to a 115 kg jaguar on an empty stomach
02-10-2022, 10:40 PM( This post was last modified: 02-10-2022, 11:23 PM by Pckts )
(02-10-2022, 02:21 AM)Twico5 Wrote: “There are no Leopard's on earth that compare to Jaguars shown.”
do you have their measurements and dimensions, like girth and etc?
Both are 110kg plus cats but body dimensions aren't given so If you'd like to compare I'll give you 104kg then a 119kg which are both as accurately and modestly measured as it gets.
These cats are measured between the pegs, height at the shoulder is straight line and only to the heel of the paw, not the tip.
First is the 104kg Jaguar which is full bellied, so really it's more along the lines of 90kg
104kg (Full Bellied Jaguar)
Total Length between the pegs - 79 8/16'' (201.9 cm)
Length of Tail- 22'' (55.8 cm) had about 2'' bit off by Piranhas
Chest Girth- 40 8/16'' (102.87 cm)
Belly Girth - 46'' Full (116.8 cm)
Head Girth - 26 8/16'' (67.31 cm)
Neck Girth - 25'' (63.5 cm)
Forearm Girth - 16 8/16" (41.9 cm)
Shoulder Height - 30'' (76.2 cm)
Total Skull Score 19 6/16" *Largest Leopard score ever recorded was 18.39''*
119kg (Empty Jaguar)
Total Length between the pegs - 83 8/16'' (212 cm)
Length of Tail- 21 8/16'' (54.6 cm) had about 2'' bit off by Piranhas
Chest Girth- 43'' (109.2 cm)
Belly Girth - 47'' Empty (119.38 cm)
Head Girth - 29'' (73.6 cm)
Neck Girth - 25 8/16'' (64.7 cm)
Forearm Girth - 17" (43.1 cm)
Shoulder Height - 28 12/16'' (73 cm)
Total Skull Score 20 1/16" *Largest Leopard score ever recorded was 18.39''*
Since all the Jaguars shown by Loveanimals are 110kg plus, it doesn't matter if they're empty or not, they'll be larger than the 104kg Full Bellied Jaguar that I presented and would most likely mean they are all more impressive in measurements.
There is no Leopard that has reached these dimensions. The largest one available is a Taxidermied one and I've already presented a female Jaguar that surpassed it's measurements when stuffed except for length and shoulder height but of course those were measured over the curves where as the female Jaguar was measured in the straight line process, and we have no idea what skinning then reattaching in a taxidermied process does to the length, girth and height of a cat. But you can be fairly sure since the skin must be stretched to do so that it embellishes it.
(02-10-2022, 02:08 AM)Pckts Wrote: don't get defensively and make backhanded remarks about "flat earthers" or some other personal attack
The personal attacks were not real personal attacks, more than anything else if I started to act in this way it is for two reasons, one in particular
1) I thought you were accusing me at random of having estimated the leopard to be 115 kg because you did not mention Imam in the first message so consequently I thought you were referring to me. And so you understand that after I think I was accused of saying the exact opposite of what I have been repeating for two days I got a little nervous? Never mind it was a misunderstanding.
It all ended when you made it clear to me that you were referring to Imam, but you should have mentioned it earlier because it seemed like an accusation, at least from my point of view.
2) the fact that you said that I think those leopards are undoubtedly 90-100 kg. This was that other thing that made me nervous, because as I showed you in the Screenshots I said at least 5 times that it was my opinion.
These are the only reasons why i got salty. Nothing more. The way I judged your method of estimating the animals to be nothing special wasn't based on personal attacks. As I said, different opinions. For how much I can disagree I have to respect them and give the reasons why I don't buy such estimate. Now my estimate is based on the build of the cat, which is absolutely massive and chocky, too chonky for me to consider the cat of an average size.
What do I think of your estimate? That you would be totally right if the cat was weighed at 70 kg. Thing it wasn't. They captured males and weighed some of them, which I think the 75 kg one was among them. They didn't weigh this animal, they compared probably to the others they have weighed and as you said they claimed it to be the biggest they captured, and estimating it to be "at least" 70 kg. Now as a lowest estimate, it's already almost as large as the 75 kg one. But they considered it to be the largest captured, hence why they said "at least 70 kg", meaning it could have gone far from that weight.
The reason I also got a bit salty is because you changed the "at least" to "around". That changes completely the sense of the phrase.
If they estimated it to be around 70 kg, which means like 65-69 kg (as around 100 kg means 95-97 kg), it wouldn't make sense for them to consider it to be the largest male. "at least" because it does consider the possibility that this male could have weighed well over 70 kg, who knows perhaps even more than 80 kg that's why they said "at least".
Not to note, you keep mentioning that they estimate the at least 70 kg male to be more impressive than mine but yet you show no proof of them claiming that.
Also to note, you have been a bit contradictory to what you said because.
The original statement you wrote is that they stated the leopard to be the largest they have captured. Not the largest in the whole Tandoureh Park range, as I'm aware they never captured the monster male I was talking about so that comparison is just made to captured males.
In the same sample of the captured males where the "at least 70 kg male" sits there there's also a 75 kg male. So now you see that if they consider this male to be the heaviest and largest they captured it would be automatically be larger in weight than the 75 kg male, hence why stating that they claimed it to be "just 70 kg" whereas 70 kg is the minimum weight given is a completely wrong way to interpretate such claim.
And even if they don't consider him as the largest male captured, "at least" means that's still the lowest estimate. What you did was take that post and use it as if it had simply estimated the feline at 70kg or even slightly less (because around 70 kg doesn't mean necessarily 70 kg, might be a little lower) and that was it, when in reality it estimated that at least it weighs 70kg and that it could weigh a lot more.
You understand my intent now.? I don't attack and never unusual any random, that had been a misunderstanding.
And also I just didn't tollerate how you used a claim and twisted its words by changing the sense of it to make a point. And I'm not even the first one who tells you such about this "at least 70 kg male".
I'm sure even Mojave in a jaguar-leopard thread in CF told you that "at least 70 kg" means it can weigh much more, hence it wouldn't make sense for the researchers to consider it as the largest male captured if they stated it to be just 70 kg whereas there's a 75 kg male in the sample.
Don't you think?
But overall I'm glad you got that it was a misunderstanding, as I wrongly thought you were accusing me of estimating the 95 kg Persian to be 115 kg.
Quote:because you changed the "at least" to "around". That changes completely the sense of the phrase.
What's the difference?
At least or around 70kg's, neither is saying 90-100kg's and if they are using a specific weight of 70kg's as a gauging #, it doesn't matter IMO. Mind you, I'm the one that posted that Leopard with the exact quotation.
Quote:
The original statement you wrote is that they stated the leopard to be the largest they have captured. Not the largest in the whole Tandoureh Park range, as I'm aware they never captured the monster male I was talking about so that comparison is just made to captured males.
In the same sample of the captured males where the "at least 70 kg male" sits there there's also a 75 kg male. So now you see that if they consider this male to be the heaviest and largest they captured it would be automatically be larger in weight than the 75 kg male, hence why stating that they claimed it to be "just 70 kg" whereas 70 kg is the minimum weight given is a completely wrong way to interpretate such claim.
You have males captured in multiple studies, the largest ever produced was 91kg. Next is the fact that we don't even know if it's full bellied or not, cattle killer or not, etc. So claiming that two other Cats from the exact same location as being record holders without any real data to go off of other than a fleeting glimpse from 100s of meters away strikes me more as a fanatical claim than anything else. Would be like me seeing one video of Tiger from 100s of meters away then stating that the Tiger is no doubt larger than any Tiger that's every been captured in history from that region.
Quote:You said that well in mentioning that you think they don't compare as even Balam said they do compare. I'm fact, she also buys that weight. But oh well it's just your own opinion and I respect it. I'll let you stick to it despite there's evidence saying the opposite
I promise you that Balam doesn't buy anything about that Leopard, we have pages on top of pages going back and forth with Luipaard.
And what evidence are you talking about? Since I already presented the actual vet claiming it to be 115kg.
Quote:Umm now i think i would be too invasive in doing that.. Maybe I will think about it. Well I do dream of a leopard of being of that size as a leopard enthusiast, and we all do agree that leopards reaching or exceeding 100 kgs in a similar way to cougars historically or even now is possible.
We just don't buy that leopard to ve of that size. And I do agree. That leopard is nothing close to a 115 kg jaguar on an empty stomach
02-11-2022, 01:50 AM( This post was last modified: 02-11-2022, 01:51 AM by Luipaard )
(02-10-2022, 10:40 PM)Pckts Wrote:
(02-10-2022, 02:21 AM)Twico5 Wrote: “There are no Leopard's on earth that compare to Jaguars shown.”
do you have their measurements and dimensions, like girth and etc?
Both are 110kg plus cats but body dimensions aren't given so If you'd like to compare I'll give you 104kg then a 119kg which are both as accurately and modestly measured as it gets.
These cats are measured between the pegs, height at the shoulder is straight line and only to the heel of the paw, not the tip.
First is the 104kg Jaguar which is full bellied, so really it's more along the lines of 90kg
104kg (Full Bellied Jaguar)
Total Length between the pegs - 79 8/16'' (201.9 cm)
Length of Tail- 22'' (55.8 cm) had about 2'' bit off by Piranhas
Chest Girth- 40 8/16'' (102.87 cm)
Belly Girth - 46'' Full (116.8 cm)
Head Girth - 26 8/16'' (67.31 cm)
Neck Girth - 25'' (63.5 cm)
Forearm Girth - 16 8/16" (41.9 cm)
Shoulder Height - 30'' (76.2 cm)
Total Skull Score 19 6/16" *Largest Leopard score ever recorded was 18.39''*
119kg (Empty Jaguar)
Total Length between the pegs - 83 8/16'' (212 cm)
Length of Tail- 21 8/16'' (54.6 cm) had about 2'' bit off by Piranhas
Chest Girth- 43'' (109.2 cm)
Belly Girth - 47'' Empty (119.38 cm)
Head Girth - 29'' (73.6 cm)
Neck Girth - 25 8/16'' (64.7 cm)
Forearm Girth - 17" (43.1 cm)
Shoulder Height - 28 12/16'' (73 cm)
Total Skull Score 20 1/16" *Largest Leopard score ever recorded was 18.39''*
Since all the Jaguars shown by Loveanimals are 110kg plus, it doesn't matter if they're empty or not, they'll be larger than the 104kg Full Bellied Jaguar that I presented and would most likely mean they are all more impressive in measurements.
There is no Leopard that has reached these dimensions. The largest one available is a Taxidermied one and I've already presented a female Jaguar that surpassed it's measurements when stuffed except for length and shoulder height but of course those were measured over the curves where as the female Jaguar was measured in the straight line process, and we have no idea what skinning then reattaching in a taxidermied process does to the length, girth and height of a cat. But you can be fairly sure since the skin must be stretched to do so that it embellishes it.
Why do you purposely add the so-called largest leopard score? And why purposely exclude the actual largest skull ever? Skull KBIN 8640 is by a margin the biggest and most impressive leopard skull ever:
*This image is copyright of its original author
Unfortunately we don't know the skull length therefore can't tell the total score with certainty. However, for comparison lionesses with a condylobasal length of 260mm-264mm had a greatest length of 280mm-300mm. Furthermore you can see that this skull completely bests skull KBIN 9053 which you claim to be the largest skull ever recorded. This skull had a shorter condylobasal length but an equal width. You can tell with certainty that skull KBIN 8640 will be longer than skull KBIN 9053. It's superior in every department except for width where they're equal. Now give me one reason to assume skull KBIN 8640 is smaller in terms of total score.
Persian Leopard (Panthera pardus saxicolor)
