|
|
Post by s on Sept 8, 2023 11:40:06 GMT
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zorba_(dog)According to your logic this was the strongest and most powerful dog ever and was near-invincible because it was so big "it is unlikely a Pantanal Jaguar would be able to kill it"? No. A Pantanal jaguar can definitely kill a 150 kg dog. It can probably not kill a 3000 lbs bull. This is a false equivalence. According to your logic bigger = stronger and better, so that 150kg dog was the strongest dog to ever live! |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Sept 8, 2023 12:04:46 GMT
Well technically a 300 lbs dog IS harder to kill than a 50 lbs or 100 lbs dog, it's just much easier to beat in a fight and it poses less offensive danger. Strictly speaking biting through its throat or breaking its neck or penetrating it's skull or whatever IS physically more difficult than doing it to a smaller dog. It's just not THAT hard and not too hard for a Jaguar or leopard. A 3000 lbs charolais bull on the other hand IS too hard.
It's also not compromised or ruined anywhere close to the level of a 300 lbs dog. It's more like a 160 lbs dog, it's a big strong bull with compromised mobility and offensive lethality compared to a Spanish fighting bull for sure, but it's still quite capable and healthy and strong. It's a draught bull and is the size it should be.
|
|
|
|
Post by s on Sept 8, 2023 12:14:55 GMT
i was simply disputing that Pitbulls were this sort of invincible machines that win battles out of sheer might and don't use anything else to their favour. But they often have to. That's the difference. If it is something they have done hundreds of millions of times through history and has been part of the normal demands in their evolution, then you have them doing it under all sorts of conditions. Uniquely, unlike wild predators, they have also been forced to face off with the best of the best most healthy adult bulls during their prime, face to face. On level ground, with no advantage. That is something they have had to deal with through their history as an animal. When you have vague mentions on "animal fact" web pages of a lynx killing a moose or a cow, and no further information, and its exceedingly and rare and unusual and you know they typically are unable to prey on moose and cattle under normal circumstances, its a good idea to assume something weird happened. Something weird didn't happen in every one of the hundreds of millions of battles between bulldogs and bulls through history. That is absurd. Your case with one petbull and one rape-victim cow where the cow died falling down a hill actually demonstrates more so why we can often dismiss one off outlier cases of wild predator predation on wild animals above their usual pay grade. It shows the strange things that can happen and can lead to weird results. There is nothing weird or unusual about a pitbull winning a battle with a bull, it is the norm, comparable to a fish swimming or a bird flying. It is comparable indeed to a lynx stalking and ambushing a snow-shoe hare. That is the lynx's equivalent to a pitbull beating a bull. 3 things 1 - Humans don't force Predators to fight cattle Bulls, unlike Bulldogs 2 - It's false Predators always pick the weakest specimens of a prey group, they are aware that bigger and heavier = more meat to eat if it's killed 3 - Bulldogs don't always target the strongest individuals either. Even when considering humans artificially bred them to be agressive they know targetting something too big has more risks than something small. |
|
|
|
Post by s on Sept 8, 2023 12:19:51 GMT
Well technically a 300 lbs dog IS harder to kill than a 50 lbs or 100 lbs dog, it's just much easier to beat in a fight and it poses less offensive danger. Strictly speaking biting through its throat or breaking its neck or penetrating it's skull or whatever IS physically more difficult than doing it to a smaller dog. It's just not THAT hard and not too hard for a Jaguar or leopard. A 3000 lbs charolais bull on the other hand IS too hard. It's also not compromised or ruined anywhere close to the level of a 300 lbs dog. It's more like a 160 lbs dog, it's a big strong bull with compromised mobility and offensive lethality compared to a Spanish fighting bull for sure, but it's still quite capable and healthy and strong. It's a draught bull and is the size it should be. Charolais bull is not free-ranging lol, 3.000lbs is as unhealthy of a weight as 900lbs is to a human. As i said before. A Spanish Fighting Bull weighting like a third of that would quite comfortably defeat one. Spanish Fighting Bulls are actually free-ranging Let's compare a fighting bull (toro de lidia) to your regular food cattle. A fighting bull will have an amazing life: several years of exercise, top tier food, and generally living in bull paradise. Then, at the end, it dies fighting, suffering for ~30 mins.
Domestic animals would change their lives to live in large ranchos with absolute freedom (by the way these ranchos are the best ecosystem in Europe for all fauna and flora breedings since hunting is not allowed inside. So having bulls there make many other species breed like eagles, lynx, rabbits, etc).
Fighting Bulls are semi-wild animals that have minimal human contact before the Bullfight and don't get their food handed out to them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Sept 8, 2023 12:25:54 GMT
Well technically a 300 lbs dog IS harder to kill than a 50 lbs or 100 lbs dog, it's just much easier to beat in a fight and it poses less offensive danger. Strictly speaking biting through its throat or breaking its neck or penetrating it's skull or whatever IS physically more difficult than doing it to a smaller dog. It's just not THAT hard and not too hard for a Jaguar or leopard. A 3000 lbs charolais bull on the other hand IS too hard. It's also not compromised or ruined anywhere close to the level of a 300 lbs dog. It's more like a 160 lbs dog, it's a big strong bull with compromised mobility and offensive lethality compared to a Spanish fighting bull for sure, but it's still quite capable and healthy and strong. It's a draught bull and is the size it should be. Charolais bull is not free-ranging lol, 3.000lbs is as unhealthy of a weight as 900lbs is to a human. As i said before. A Spanish Fighting Bull weighting like a third of that would quite comfortably defeat one. Spanish Fighting Bulls are actually free-ranging Let's compare a fighting bull (toro de lidia) to your regular food cattle. A fighting bull will have an amazing life: several years of exercise, top tier food, and generally living in bull paradise. Then, at the end, it dies fighting, suffering for ~30 mins. Domestic animals would change their lives to live in large ranchos with absolute freedom (by the way these ranchos are the best ecosystem in Europe for all fauna and flora breedings since hunting is not allowed inside. So having bulls there make many other species breed like eagles, lynx, rabbits, etc).
Fighting Bulls are semi-wild animals that have minimal human contact before the Bullfight and don't get their food handed out to them.
All of the above applies to most Charolais bulls. I interact with them in person regularly. They live on huge vast properties where they graze to feed themselves. And yes those properties are by far the best wild ecosystems in Australia with the most biodiversity. They are not prized for their aggression, and haven't been through their history, but they WERE prized for their strength and pulling power originally when they were being established as a breed. That is why they are big. They arent fighters like spanish Bulls, but they are "strongmen", and today strongmen that live in the wilderness and feed themselves. They are not fat incels. You have that wrong. You learned a bit about Spanish bulls but then assumed all other cattle were feedlot cattle and that is not true. Much of Spanish bull lifestyle translates to other beef cattle as well. |
|
|
|
Post by s on Sept 8, 2023 12:29:09 GMT
Charolais bull is not free-ranging lol, 3.000lbs is as unhealthy of a weight as 900lbs is to a human. As i said before. A Spanish Fighting Bull weighting like a third of that would quite comfortably defeat one. Spanish Fighting Bulls are actually free-ranging Let's compare a fighting bull (toro de lidia) to your regular food cattle. A fighting bull will have an amazing life: several years of exercise, top tier food, and generally living in bull paradise. Then, at the end, it dies fighting, suffering for ~30 mins. Domestic animals would change their lives to live in large ranchos with absolute freedom (by the way these ranchos are the best ecosystem in Europe for all fauna and flora breedings since hunting is not allowed inside. So having bulls there make many other species breed like eagles, lynx, rabbits, etc).
Fighting Bulls are semi-wild animals that have minimal human contact before the Bullfight and don't get their food handed out to them.
All of the above applies to most Charolais bulls. I interact with them in person regularly. They live on huge vast properties where they graze to feed themselves. And yes those properties are by far the best wild ecosystems in Australia with the most biodiversity. They are not prized for their aggression, and haven't been through their history, but they WERE prized for their strength and pulling power originally when they were being established as a breed. That is why they are big. They arent fighters like spanish Bulls, but they are "strongmen", and today strongmen that live in the wilderness and feed themselves. They are not fat incels. You have that wrong. You learned a bit about Spanish bulls but then assumed all other cattle were feedlot cattle and that is not true. Much of Spanish bull lifestyle translates to other beef cattle as well. Charolais bulls are the Bull version of other animals eaten for food (like Chickens), that is, they are artificially and unhealthily fed mass amounts of steroids and antibiotics for more meat production, with actual health being a secondary priority at best |
|
|
|
Post by s on Sept 8, 2023 12:32:28 GMT
i was simply disputing that Pitbulls were this sort of invincible machines that win battles out of sheer might and don't use anything else to their favour. There is nothing weird or unusual about a pitbull winning a battle with a bull, it is the norm, comparable to a fish swimming or a bird flying. It is comparable indeed to a lynx stalking and ambushing a snow-shoe hare. That is the lynx's equivalent to a pitbull beating a bull. Subjugate =/= Kill, i already admitted that Pitbulls have far superior subjugation ability to Lynxes. Homever a Pitbull killing an adult Bull is as much of a freak case as an Eurasian Lynx killing an adult male Moose through Ambush. There are many cases of battles between Spanish Fighting Bulls and Alanos where the Alanos managed to make the Bull surrender but fail to kill it, in fact i can't see a single case of a Bull actually dying in fights against Dogs, except one case where the Bull was already bleeding out due to Lance and Crossbow hits by the time they let out the Alanos. |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Sept 8, 2023 12:32:59 GMT
All of the above applies to most Charolais bulls. I interact with them in person regularly. They live on huge vast properties where they graze to feed themselves. And yes those properties are by far the best wild ecosystems in Australia with the most biodiversity. They are not prized for their aggression, and haven't been through their history, but they WERE prized for their strength and pulling power originally when they were being established as a breed. That is why they are big. They arent fighters like spanish Bulls, but they are "strongmen", and today strongmen that live in the wilderness and feed themselves. They are not fat incels. You have that wrong. You learned a bit about Spanish bulls but then assumed all other cattle were feedlot cattle and that is not true. Much of Spanish bull lifestyle translates to other beef cattle as well. Charolais bulls are the Bull version of other animals eaten for food (like Chickens), that is, they are artificially and unhealthily fed mass amounts of steroids and antibiotics for more meat production, with actual health being a secondary priority at best False. You are again fixated on feed stall factory farmed cattle, like they are the only beef cattle, and this is frankly ignorance on your part. Such cattle have nothing to fear from stray pitbulls, or anything, except for their life of misery. The charolais in question was outside and feeding itself on grass. |
|
|
|
Post by s on Sept 8, 2023 12:47:50 GMT
Charolais bulls are the Bull version of other animals eaten for food (like Chickens), that is, they are artificially and unhealthily fed mass amounts of steroids and antibiotics for more meat production, with actual health being a secondary priority at best False. You are again fixated on feed stall factory farmed cattle, like they are the only beef cattle, and this is frankly ignorance on your part. Such cattle have nothing to fear from stray pitbulls, or anything, except for their life of misery. The charolais in question was outside and feeding itself on grass. You forget this is after a hurricane lol, the farm/staple of that Charolais Bull might as well have been damaged allowing him to escape There is no comparison between Charolais Bulls living on a barebones surface area, being tightly watched by humans, which at the end of the say is still a farm just with more illusion of Movement and a Spanish Fighting Bull being raised alone in Dehesas with their own ec ![]() osystems.  ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Sept 8, 2023 13:07:01 GMT
I don't know exactly what particular conditions that Charolais was living under. But I do know it WASN'T a factory farmed cow, which is how you are trying to characterise it (in fact no bull actually is. They contribute semen to that world but a bull with nuts will never be living that.)
In Australia most charolais live on vast ranches that are ecosystems that make those dehesas look small. The USA also has many very huge ranches that are wild ecosystems with free ranging cattle feeding themselves and looking after themselves. The USA ALSO has a shitload of factory farmed cattle, but again, even during a hurricane they aren't breaking out and roaming the wastes, they also just aren't bulls.
Now, I shouldn't pretend factory feedlot cattle are the only wuss cattle, there are also hobby farm cattle, and show cattle/prize bulls. Dairy cattle. Maybe this is a show bull that was handfed and pampered, but by far the most likely thing it is, is a free ranging pasture grazing unsupervised beef-breeding bull, with most factors of its lifestyle in common with Spanish bulls, not all, but most. That is what it most likely was.
Most importantly, the bulls that Bulldogs are designed to deal with, most of the 800 million cases of bull vs dog through history, included free ranging bulls that lived essentially in the wilderness like Spanish cattle. Bulldogs exist FOR THOSE bulls in particular. Those are their bulls that they deal with. Not feedlot factory cattle, not pampered tame show cattle, not small hobby farm cattle, not dairy cattle.
Free range semi wild beef cattle, and including specifically Spanish fighting bulls too, those are the cattle Bulldogs are for.
|
|
|
|
Post by s on Sept 8, 2023 13:30:28 GMT
Most importantly, the bulls that Bulldogs are designed to deal with, most of the 800 million cases of bull vs dog through history, included free ranging bulls that lived essentially in the wilderness like Spanish cattle. Bulldogs exist FOR THOSE bulls in particular. Those are their bulls that they deal with. Not feedlot factory cattle, not pampered tame show cattle, not small hobby farm cattle, not dairy cattle. Free range semi wild beef cattle, and including specifically Spanish fighting bulls too, those are the cattle Bulldogs are for. You are actually right. Here is an article (in Spanish, just use Google translate) about fights between Lidia Bulls and Alanos. You can see that the Alanos (from what im seeing the bare Minimum needed was 2, as if only one was used Bull could still use half his body to defend itself, as remarked by contemporaries) did manage to subdue the Bulls in certain ocassions but they weren't able to kill them. losmitosdeltoro.com/el-perro-en-los-toros/ |
|
|
|
Post by s on Sept 8, 2023 13:30:50 GMT
Also where did you get the 800 million number?
|
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Sept 8, 2023 13:35:41 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Sept 8, 2023 13:40:13 GMT
Also where did you get the 800 million number? Guesstimate. Somewhat hyperbolic, maybe? Not even sure, the point is every bulldog in history, until 150 years ago, and since then it's only many of the Bulldogs but not all, but basically most Bulldogs that ever lived fought and subjugated many bulls each, since forever, since bulls were domesticated (and before for thousands of years, were doing it to wild aurochs bulls before for thousands of years) and the bulldog lineage and design evolved in response/unison with that process. |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Sept 8, 2023 13:56:58 GMT
Most importantly, the bulls that Bulldogs are designed to deal with, most of the 800 million cases of bull vs dog through history, included free ranging bulls that lived essentially in the wilderness like Spanish cattle. Bulldogs exist FOR THOSE bulls in particular. Those are their bulls that they deal with. Not feedlot factory cattle, not pampered tame show cattle, not small hobby farm cattle, not dairy cattle. Free range semi wild beef cattle, and including specifically Spanish fighting bulls too, those are the cattle Bulldogs are for. You are actually right. Here is an article (in Spanish, just use Google translate) about fights between Lidia Bulls and Alanos. You can see that the Alanos (from what im seeing the bare Minimum needed was 2, as if only one was used Bull could still use half his body to defend itself, as remarked by contemporaries) did manage to subdue the Bulls in certain ocassions but they weren't able to kill them. losmitosdeltoro.com/el-perro-en-los-toros/It is not their application to kill them. So yeah you can say that is rare and even a mistake when that happens. If you wanted to say it is comparable to a Eurasian lynx killing a moose... eh, I'd still strongly disagree but it's not totally patently false. However the subjugation of nasty bulls which leopards and pumas can't subjugate or kill or do anything to, that is not comparable to a lynx killing a moose, that is comparable to a lynx killing a hare. |
|
