grippingwhiteness So you favor a gorilla then, whats the problem?
Yes we do, there are around 4/5 accounts of leopards killing silverbacks, but guess what though? All cases were done by ambush or to sleeping gorillas. Therefore, you absolutely cant translate this to what would happen in a fair, face to face fight.
Nope, the original source (which i posted above) has ONLY the leopard dying. All the other sources are secondary and misinterpreted the original source which states otherwise. And there are also another 2 accounts of gorillas killing leopards.
Yes, you have to shit in your hand and get scared because you have no idea who you're dealing with, probably if you're who I think you're just a little nerd who has just entered the world of animals and doesn't know how the animal world works, or maybe you never know you still lower yourself to the level of certain idiots who dare to comment from a human point of view and "bias" the behavior of certain animals.
Without realizing that you are dealing with someone who has annihilated and killed biased users light years worse than what you could ever be. And that he knows how nature really works.
Aren't you that guy on Carnivora that I destroyed?
Good, you are completely wrong in saying Angel/drip kong favors gorillas over lions and tigers, and I have this evidence against your claim:
He has never ever claimed such thing, your accusations are inflated and unfounded. You'd be right if you were referring to Knuckles but you've never met him and never will.
Are you DOM's King Kodiak? Even worse for you because if you are I have been training for a year to kick your ass in this debate, simply because King kodiak is a kid who spews bullshit about cats and deserves not only to be devastated given the many logical errors he makes but above all, he deserves a life lesson on concepts he has no idea about.
Are you really him? I hope not for you otherwise may God have mercy on what I'm going to do to you shortly.
Moctezuma, anyway I already harassed you on Quora a few days ago where you spewed the bullshit that according to you a tiger would never attack and would never be able to kill a water buffalo face to face in a "fair" fight (who the fuck are you for define what is fair based on the nature of a predator? Are you a referee? You are nobody's shit, Mother nature is the real referee because she created such animals for such behaviors) but obviously as I answered you no longer have spoke. When liars are presented with undeniable fact they shut up and disappear. It's so enjoyable
Returning to King kodiak ... his worst flaw is believing he is so special that he can consider himself an arbiter of the world of nature to decide and say as done (so you can't go against him, he said it and that's how you can't go disagree with him) what he thinks is "fair" or not, without understanding that we are not in the fucking modern human world during a boxing match where there are written rules and that if you violate you are out.
We are in the fucking natural world where the only rule is "kill or be killed", no animal cares if it is "fair" or not, the only thing that matters is survival.
In your opinion, an antelope that is taken from behind by a leopard starts whining and malding like "nooo bastard!!!! You got me from behind it's not worth it I didn't have time to react and lose you!!!! Coward!! !" ?
No shit Sherlock, they are animals they don't have this human morality, all that antelope would think is "damn!!! !" and over time the antelopes have evolved their eye sockets in order to obtain a peripheral vision that includes a very extended range and which allows them to see even behind their head in order to be able to notice a predator intent on ambushing them.
Nature finds a way, there's no "rules". It's not that leopards stop attacking to ambush and go against their nature because an idiot of the human world has decided that it's "unfair" on the contrary, ungulates evolve to be able to counter this tactic of the feline and they do it by evolving their eyes placed on the sides of the head to be able to distinguish the movements even behind them.
Each animal develops hunting techniques which, based on their abilities and how they have evolved, are fair to them.
Ambush is fair, contrary to what you anti-nature human might think, for a feline because otherwise you're asking it to do something it's not designed to do. He has to take his biggest and most dangerous prey by surprise in order to overwhelm it and kill it quickly because it already has little resistance and above all it is the perfect machine, if something goes wrong and he gets injured he risks being compromised forever. Tell an average feline to attack face to face and risk a lot, the feline would slap you and tell you that it would not go on a suicide mission (although many times some big cats attack prey even face to face, nature is not just black and white).
Just as for a wild canid on the contrary it is fair to exhaust the prey before being able to overwhelm it when it is completely incapable of defending itself due to fatigue, tell a canid to use the tactics of the feline and it will say "are you retarded? I'm not strong enough to be able to beat him all at once, I have to tire him to be able to hurt him and finish when he can no longer defend himself well!".
So stop considering the ambush as something "unfair", you are in the world of nature you are not in human society, they are two different worlds where the creatures that live there have two completely different concepts of mortality: wild animals and men. The formers live and behave according to how nature created them (there are no rules, you just have to survive) while the latter strayed from nature and works at odds with it, like a disease on the planet and worse still created a society with moral principles making him so arrogant that he considers himself important enough to be able to judge primal animal instincts as he would judge his fellows. A leopard doesn't give a fuck if he's considered a coward or not after killing a silverback gorilla in ambush, he doesn't give a fuck about that, the only thing he cares about is eating and chewing on the primate's innards for to survive. He has no concept of what is unfair or fair to him, the only thing that is fair is that he eats and you, his prey, die to satiate him.
I have a very long history of flame wars and very aggressive debates with wolf fans, so much so that I have come to hate them outrageously (many dog fans hate them too) but when any of them have come to tell me that wolves are dominant their cougar and that wild dogs are dominant over leopards I didn't bat an eye. They are right, it is a rule of nature. It is obvious that they are dominant only in numbers because one by one a puma would annihilate and quarter a wolf with eyes closed from ease and so would a leopard to a wild dog or a dhole. It is logical, the main thing is to recognize this. But then again I have no problem accepting that wolves are dominant over a feline that I respect and love and I don't bring up the argument that "it's easy to win as a pack, anyone would do it, cowards do it, of course cowards play UNFAIR, the wolf would be outhunted by cougars if it was a fair fight one on one".
As much as I hate canine fans no , I never used that excuse . Because it's wrong to say it's unfair when a pack of wolves goes on rampage on a lone cougar in a pack vs one situation. It's unfair from YOUR human biased point of view, for the wolves it's perfectly fair because one on one they'd get grappled down and one shotted by the more powerful cat. As much as I consider cat ambush a fair fight, I also consider a whole pack of canids mauling to death a lone cat fair. It's called acknowledgment that in nature there's no referee judging the fairness as the only rule is "kill or be killed".
It's called being an honest fan with NO retardness or bias. Something you"re rich of . bias.
And then, cowardice, although (in the human world!) I don't see myself in it because I'm very confident in myself, I consider it as a current form of pure intelligence. Sometimes being smart makes you more successful instead of being the fake badass who faces everyone face to face without fear and then takes it in the ass doubly.
How is it that leopards despite being again the ones suffering from immense size disadvantage (with gorillas) and number disadvantage (chimps) they are still able to be the ones killing the former with a HUGE more frequency than the opposite happening? See, being elusive and "cowardly" by using ambush is smart.
As I already said there is only one rule in Nature : kill or be killed. There's no fair or unfair, that's how you humans are used to describe nature with your morality that comes from society which never ever shall be put together or compared with nature.
Win or die, a win is a win in nature and a death is a loss.
What counts in the end is final victory, no matter how it happens.
That's how war also happened and still does, probably one of the very few moments where humans still act predominantly as nature would : no rules, just defeat the enemy's army.
How much do you think it matters when the legions of the Roman empire invade Germany and the barbarian tribes scatter in the forest and flee like "unfair cowards" if later, one by one, the latter ambushes and annihilates the majority of those legions when they are you not aware? Sure the germans were cowards to avoid romans in all face to face battles in open space, but at the end it's not them who got completely crushed and slaughtered, it was the badass romans who got crushed .
Three roman legions in teutoburg which was such a devastating victory that the Romans, despite being able to get revenge A few years later by defeating the same German chief who betrayed them, completely abandoned the plans to conquer Germany east of the Elbe with.
No matter if they won in a cowardly way; they won, that's what matters.
It's a very intelligent tactic, no matter if they run most of the time when they are face to face, they will later ambush you when you don't expect it and destroy you. Nobody cares if you made them flee and nobody cares to call them cowards when they avoided you. You're dead now, by their hands, and they are alive, cheering on your bloody legionary suit. They won.
This is how reality works. It matters who lives and who dies, not how that happens.
Gorillas, including silverbacks, fair very bad with ambushing leopards from most of the accounts we have, with only two gorillas actually showing a very aggressive and violent behavior towards attacking leopards (and one of them still died, you can cope harder by malding and claiming that's not the original report but a SeCOnD hAnD sOuRce because you're again confusing yourself with another report and you have no ide of what you're talking about). Sure, these leopards mostly ambush them, who cares? A win is a win, in nature.
This is just the beginning .
Let's start with the fact that yes, I favor an aggressive leopard with a bloodlusted attitude against any gorilla, including a silverback, on ambush. I could probably even favor him against the average gorilla that is light years away from being as aggressive and fight-willing as a chimpanzee. Probably that 312 lb gorilla that got defeated in a cage fight by a leopard in a face to face encounter was one of this type. Against a rare, aggressive and badass gorilla? Sure I'll favor the gorilla, but I also acknowledge that face to face even against an aggressive defensive gorilla the leopard can put up a great fight and succeed in killing the ape considering how badly the gorilla will suffer from injuries given how thin and weak primate skin is. And it happened, George's Shaller account is the living proof that even if a gorilla aggressively fights back a leopard likely 3 times smaller is capable of suffering terribly from injuries and die afterwards. And no, my account is 100% valid and from first hand , you can cope harder in the children corner with your fag-boystic "sEcOnD hAnD" accusations. You still have not realized that you're using a valid account which is ANOTHER instance which wasn't even reported by Schaller. It was just represented in a drawing made by Schaller, that report is just a 1928 native's story. Schaller, on the other hand, found himself a dead leopard and a dead gorilla with mortally inflicted wounds and it's a scientific record. But I'll get to it later.
This source aswell claims that it's not always an ambush happening but also gorillas (including males) fleeing from leopards (debunking the invented claim that gorillas are never afraid of leopards) have been caught and also killed in the end by the cat.
An ambush is when the prey is unaware, a chase happens because the animal acknowledged your presence and tried to get away. It's aware of your presence though.
So yes, leopards can and have killed adult male gorillas both by ambush and face to face attacks. So another whole BS claim from you that "aLl leoPaRd atTAcKs aRe AmBuShEs".
Will I always favor them? Obviously not, I've already given my position. The important thing is that you acknowledge two big mistakes you've done when debating about these animals
1) Ambush is not unfair, for the leopard it's fair, it's you human creating inside your biased mind a hypothetical battle arena where a leopard displays an alien behavior and doesn't rely on ambush anymore. There, the leopard would call you to be unfair, because you're taking out from it one of its best weapons, which is :
We are talking about animal vs animal in nature, there are no rules here.
2) leopards have killed adult male gorillas not only by ambush but also in attacks where the latter was very aware of its presence.
Now, the big part.
๐๐ฒ๐ผ๐ฟ๐ด๐ฒ ๐ฆ๐ฐ๐ต๐ฎ๐น๐น๐ฒ๐ฟ'๐ ๐๐ฐ๐ฐ๐ผ๐๐ป๐
I've been researching a lot about leopard and gorilla interactions as I'm a leopard fan and was (and am) fascinated by the fact that leopards prey on these giant primates, so I happened upon proboards where I saw King Kodiak and Shadow debating and raging about this account. I must say, both King Kodiak and Shadow are two badass with clear vision problems. King Kodiak to defend a claim that isn't true at all and that can be clearly seen even in the photos he kept spamming, Shadow on the other hand is a jerk for not having noticed this thing and not correcting King Kodiak , if I had been in that proboard at the time I would have ridiculed you both and given you glasses, but not before having humbled you both since you are always been two nerds who suck being nerds lol. If you are Kodiak, your malding and nonsense is clearly evident since you don't even know how to read the records you present as supposed evidence to support your thesis. Apparently you only have debate against other fagots who are easy to blame, it doesn't work like that with the God of flame who has been doing this stuff since before you were probably born.
As I mentioned, even on Carnivora, there are only two cases where gorillas were able to kill leopards: one where the gorilla died as well (and that's George Schaller's report from first hand experience) and one where only the leopard died and that's just what you're showing.
Wow, shocked? Yes, you always talked about George Schaller's record showing ANOTHER one. All you fools have always done this because you are so underdeveloped and retarded (you clearly belong to another breed) that you can't even read the same accounts you show.
What you have shown IS NOT George Schaller's account but a story told by a native in Burbridge in 1928, where the gorilla killed the leopard and that was it. This was a native's story told in Burbridge.
of which THEN George Schaller made an artistic representation of it.
This completely changes from the report I'm referring to which comes DIRECTLY from a study done by George Schaller in 2011, because George Schaller was a biologist who hiked and studied the African rainforest himself and reported TWO famous instances where leopards and gorillas clashed. The first one is a straight up successful predation attempt by a leopard on a fully grown mature silverback gorilla.
George Schaller found a dead silverback with classical leopard preying wounds, to note that the gorilla's intestines were exposed indicating that the leopard raked the hell out of it with its rear claws, a thing that would NOT happen if it was an attack from behind. Probably the leopard charged from the front while the gorilla was asleep
And finally his famous OFFICIAL report from his study named "Making a Last Stand Counterattack and Chutzpah Living primate" where BOTH leopard and gorilla killed each other.
He was there when the two animals were found :
In 2011, George Schaller, a wildlife biologist who worked for National Geographic, reported that he had found a large male Leopard and a dominant silverback Gorilla, both dead in their study "Making a Last Counterattack and boldness ".
He had determined that a fight had taken place in the forest between the two, and both had died of mutually inflicted wounds
Source: Life of mountain gorillas
Another report of the same instance :
This one is a TOTAL different record (especially because this one is from a study published in 2011 by a scientific source led by G.Schaller whereas your record is from 1928 and it's a story told by a native so it's a second hand source and it's not even as reliable as the one witnessed by a fucking biologist, but since the same biologist made a representation of it I'll treat this record as a reliable one)
from the one you've sent and here both animals killed themselves. You've been confusing the two records entirely from the beginning and it was so easy to find out because all you had to do is using those fucking incapacitated eyes you've got (probably brown ones, light eyes see better and I'm the living proof) and READ what you had in front of you instead of misinterpreting everything.
