Guest Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 The tiger against orang isn't a good fight I'd say. Firstly, cats are supreme killers, designed to bring a quick death. Their agility and instinct when it comes to a kill is unrivaled amongst animals. The only reason your pet dog strikes fear in a 10 lb cat is because of the size difference. If you put a 50lb cat against a 100lb dog...I'd take the cat everytime. Cats have a actual "kill" bite, meaning they either go for the strangle hold or the vertebrae. While dogs (dog family) rarely exhibit even the strangle technique. They typically "worry" bite prey to death. So there's not many animals that could survive a tiger attack, I even doubt the grizzly could. I feel the squatch is just to powerful and intelligent for a bear. People who think otherwise are thinking of squatch in the manner you would think of a domesticated man. And I know we learn in horror movies that claws are just the ultimate, but in truth that opposable thumb thing can do so much more damage coupled with a brain. For all we know a BF is smart enough and agile enough to simply get behind the bear and place it in a choke hold. The only issue would be is it strong enough (which I believe) and it could at the same time leverage to break the bears back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 And for all we know BF is not smart enough and agile enough to do those things either. So it's strength wouldn't be the only issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 http://www.bfro.net/...ort.asp?id=8547Note the BF leaped twice to cover 30 yards, knocked the pig against a tree with one hand, and then pounded it to death with blows "like slamming your fist on a table top". This all happened within about four seconds. You realize that 30 yards, is 90 feet... and that a report like this one, is far from credible. I agree that part is suspect. But people exaggerate, especially when they're scared. So, just as with a height discrepancy, it doesnt kill the report for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 6, 2013 Share Posted April 6, 2013 Many Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 6, 2013 Share Posted April 6, 2013 Many years ago I watched a video - I think it was something like Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom - where an orangutan got into a fight with a large cat (leopard or jaguar). It was the most ferocious animal fight I've ever seen. The orangutan "rode" on the back of the cat while simultaneously beating the cat with his fists and biting the cat on the back of his neck. I don't remember if the orangutan killed the cat, but he definitely whipped him. I remember that I saw this video after I had seen the movie "Every Which Way But Loose" which featured the orangutan named "Clyde" who was so funny. Seeing the wild orangutan fight with such ferocity was a shocking contrast to the one in the movie. I think most of us have a sanitized view of wild animal behavior. Based on that orangutan's fighting skills with the cat and extrapolating the size of a Sasquatch, a fight with a grizzly, would be a battle of biblical proportions! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted April 6, 2013 Share Posted April 6, 2013 http://www.bfro.net/...ort.asp?id=8547Note the BF leaped twice to cover 30 yards, knocked the pig against a tree with one hand, and then pounded it to death with blows "like slamming your fist on a table top". This all happened within about four seconds. You realize that 30 yards, is 90 feet... and that a report like this one, is far from credible. Totally disagree. Ninety feet? Something like this happens ninety feet away from me, I'm not missing a trick. Besides which: one thing one must always be alert to in reports is the potential inaccuracy of witness estimates. They can't be take for salt by themselves. What if it was really sixty? Or closer? I don't think people are great judges of distance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 6, 2013 Share Posted April 6, 2013 I dont know which would win a fight, I tend to think the grizzly being a "wilder animal" would have the avantage, but that only because I havent seen a Sasquatch and tend to think of them as more human or less "wild", which of course may be completely wrong. But having said that, a seven hundred pound all muscled up big guy with the ability to use available tools, clubs and rocks, and intelligence to use and plan a strategy could mess up about any 'wild' animal in a hurry with a eight foot five inch tree trunk, or a few ten pound rocks thrown accurately from fifty to a hundred miles an hour. Assuming the use of and accuracy thereof and the velocity of the thrown rocks being comparable to a human athlete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted April 6, 2013 Share Posted April 6, 2013 http://www.bfro.net/...ort.asp?id=8547Note the BF leaped twice to cover 30 yards, knocked the pig against a tree with one hand, and then pounded it to death with blows "like slamming your fist on a table top". This all happened within about four seconds. You realize that 30 yards, is 90 feet... and that a report like this one, is far from credible. I should also have reminded that in the case of this report, the guy was looking through a 9 power rifle scope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 7, 2013 Share Posted April 7, 2013 Apex predators typically avoid each other unless protecting a kill or their young. Even an injury sustained in a fight can be fatal, no matter who is the baddest sumbitch in the forest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 7, 2013 Share Posted April 7, 2013 Ferocious? They have swiped peoples heads off, twisted dogs spines i the opposite direction, thrown full grown men to the floor, beat wild boar to death, chased down deer and yanked there legs off, put dents in mobile homes with there fists, invaded houses, smashed windows, ripped doors of there hinges, reached into cars and carried off people never to be seen again, I'd say they can be ferocious, but invincible? No, there massive frame, thick bones and heavy coating of muscle makes them resistant to bullets and most injuries, but we have enough reports of bullets wounding them and killing them to agree with the Schwarzenegger school of thinking, namely, "if it bleeds, we can kill it". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 7, 2013 Share Posted April 7, 2013 bigteddy, I think what you meant to type was that "we have reports of...*insert feats of strength/aggression here*" I'm far more swayed to the "believer" side than the sceptic side, but its such ludicrous claims that cause what may be decent reports to lose their credency. Lets be honest, if there were dogs that had been twisted in half like a christmas cracker or people being carried off into the night, with witnesses (to which there must be or these reports wouldn't surface) then there would be a manhunt (pardon the pun). The best thing that anyone on the "believer" or "pro squatch" side can do is to err on the side of common sense until you have physical evidence. Believing isn't crazy, believing every sensationalised half assed report is. Sasquatch steals bus off the road and jet packs off into the deep forest...could happen! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 7, 2013 Share Posted April 7, 2013 bigteddy, I think what you meant to type was that "we have reports of...*insert feats of strength/aggression here*" I'm far more swayed to the "believer" side than the sceptic side, but its such ludicrous claims that cause what may be decent reports to lose their credency. Lets be honest, if there were dogs that had been twisted in half like a christmas cracker or people being carried off into the night, with witnesses (to which there must be or these reports wouldn't surface) then there would be a manhunt (pardon the pun). The best thing that anyone on the "believer" or "pro squatch" side can do is to err on the side of common sense until you have physical evidence. Believing isn't crazy, believing every sensationalised half assed report is. Sasquatch steals bus off the road and jet packs off into the deep forest...could happen! Hey man, just reporting what people have claimed, don't believe half of em myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 7, 2013 Share Posted April 7, 2013 Fair enough bigteddy, I apologise if I came across as sarcy or aggressive. I just think that surely most people with half an ounce of common sense can determine which of these reports have a ring of possible plausability about them, and those which wouldnt be out of place in a sci fi book. I definately think that as long as we have people creating these ludicrous reports (and equally, people believing them) then bigfoot/sasquatch will be continue to be looked upon with ridicule and contempt by "accepted" branches of science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 8, 2013 Share Posted April 8, 2013 And for all we know BF is not smart enough and agile enough to do those things either. So it's strength wouldn't be the only issue. For all you know I suppose... Myself...I have no doubt about the intelligence or agility. Regarding the intelligence, it's obvious by the simple fact we can't even prove to the public they exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted April 8, 2013 Share Posted April 8, 2013 I think that the inability to prove to the public that they exist may say more about human intelligence than it says about that of the sasquatch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts