an just for fun:
Two major factors that would get him laughed at in the scientifical community.
There doesn't appear to be any reason to think a lion would ever stand a chance against a tiger. All the scientifical evidence indicates the opposite.
There doesn't appear to be any reason to think a lion would ever stand a chance against a tiger. All the scientifical evidence indicates the opposite.
The scientifical community fully embraces hearsay and cartoon pictures as scientifical evidence. It's all very scientifical, so most of us wouldn't understand.
lol, The same people, with the same desperation, with the same excusses and false replys such as name calling since you have nothing on topic to hide your insecuritys how badly your butt hurts from the constistant beat down of facts over lies I keep applying over you tards. Hey if it makes you feel better that a mental person constantly humiliates you with actual facts, then hey...more power to you. lol
Every thing has been presented in the last page within the two links, modern will be 19th - 20th century, which is what I provided, there are others that range from 18th century and below, but I dont see anything wrong with their credability, as goes every one takes in the law of Issac newton, should we all dis-regard what was set in place over 4 centurys ago and make up new ideas?... the wheel has been around since BC times should we do away with it and just use hover jet packs which you emit we have?
Good luck.
And good to see, you welshe block, soundmanred and the other butt hurt cry baby chumps have some of my shit splattered all of your sigs/locations ...sorry I ran out of toilet paper, but it looks good on you. XD XD XE
There doesn't appear to be any reason to think a lion would ever stand a chance against a tiger. All the scientifical evidence indicates the opposite.
Is that why people like clyde beatty who's testimonial said he has had just about 50 tigers killed by his lions in his 40 year career as the guiness world record holder of the most lions and tigers in one cage arena, and to back it up 30 reported incidents of it happening in front of thousands of people, while at the same time gives his personal opinion that the average lion is heavier, bigger and taller than the average tiger and the mane and fighting experince of the lion is why he gave a 9/10 win for the lion?
http://www.google.com/search?q=+Gui...=UTF-8&tbm=bks&ei=4HhTUsrhKKjgiAKfqoHoAQ&sa=N
Clyde beatty guiness/40 year observation/experince's opinion>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Cerpain taxt's zero experince, retarded butt hurt opinion
lol
And is that why, the other biggest acts of all time that mixed lions and tigers has the hall of famers like Dave hoover, Bert nelson, Terrell jacobs, Damoo dhotre all gave similar statements like clyde beatty and agree with him? XD XD Is that also why the top historians with Ph.d's and Masters degrees all state the lion won over the tiger through out history:
- Historian Ken Spiro (M.A In History from The Vermont College of Norwich University)
- Historian Margaret George (University with a B.A. and Stanford University with an M.A)
- Historian and Archaeologist Martin seyers (Ph.D of Classical Archaeology, Egyptologym at Vienna University)
- Professor Thomas Gray (Historian at Cambridge University.)
- Professor Adolph Hausrath theologian (Privatdozent P.D German universities)
- Theologian Edward beecher (Graduated in Yale college in 1822)
Thats just for the roman arenas, there is also 20 historians for the english stating the lion always won, 10 historians of india that state the lion usually won, archaeologist (science) that has 100 artifacts showing a lion defeating a tiger, yet not even 5 of the opposite, over 20 Biologist/Dale miquele, (Scientist); Ecologoist/Jemenski (Scientist); Zoologist/Dave salmoni, (Scientist); and other walks of science that all say the lion is the tigers superior...in fact charles darwin one of the greatest influential scientist of all time states the lions mane was its protecting factor that the tiger is without.
Funny how clyde beatty who has lodes of lions that killed his tigers, yet you can gather all the times through out...all of history... the tiger has killed the lion and you wont get more than just what that one man has accumilated....thats insanely pathetic....just like you...not only pathetic, but it emits how butt hurt you are...If you can't accept the basics or show proof atleast that comes any where near what you claim, I can't even imagine how much in denial you are with your day to day life...poor guys, must be getting bullied, slapped around and humiliated daily. lol
Sad
He's pretty big but Ligers are bigger
Who gives a fuck? Both can be taken down with 10g of lead.
Half of the tigers and lions Clyde used, stated by him were caught wild as adults, he dident like using captive animals as he said they were so spoiled they dident like performing the acts, and they based there opinion on wild individuals as they were asked if wild ones met what would happen...instead of bitching and whining, you should do some actual research if you wanna be a persistant troll, but you already know this, you're just a butt hurt bias chump.
Why are you so angry all the time? I just asked a question.
Is there a confirmation that half of them were wild? Was the half of the wild animals lions by chance?
Warning killer mice are loose, they are bigger than tigers and highly dangerous.
lol Thats not fair, thats a sumtran tiger, one of the smallest tiger sub-speices, the siberian tiger is the largest tiger at even weights of 1,000 pounds he can run at 50 mph...XD XD XD XE Hilarious.
theres a small sub-species the size of a mouse ? So who would win in that fight, equal sized mouse or equal sized tiger ? The mouse DEFINITELY has a proportionally LARGER set of teeth relative to the size of their body, that could like chomp a tiger in half almost.
I want one for a pet...