but it was on newsround!
It was on Newsround on TV that I saw the photo for the first time, and it looked like a very poor fake there, but the one on their site looks plausibly genuine.
You’re not wrong. I’ve got two Dutch Dwarves (very much the antithesis of the German Giant) who weigh in at barely 2kg apiece and they could pull my house down around my ears if I gave them the chance. In the two months since we moved in to our all too open plan new house they have:
shredded the wooden hearth rail;
shredded the leg of the coffee table;
chewed through the power-cable of my laptop (they’re fine, it’s broken);
chewed a hole in the back of the (old and soon to be replaced) sofa and made a nest in it.
This is not to mention the territorial crapping which I suppose is part and parcel of moving rabbits into a strange house. What a 7.7kg bunny could achieve is beyond me - but I expect they’d soon be kept outside, fed twice a day and otherwise ignored. What fun.
“Want food! get me some more carrots, bitch!”
“Um… Yes, right away, sorry bunny”
“That’s MR Bunny to you, bitch! And jump to it!”
They had video of the rabbit on MSNBC last night, and I agree that the enlarged version on the BBC site looks a bit distorted. It is still a huge rabbit, however.
Karnickel. No, seriously. That sounds much more intimidating than “Kaninchen” doesn’t it?
Of course in some parts of Germany that big hare would just be called “Braten” or “Abendessen”.
A meter tall. What the hell does that mean, its length when you set it on two legs and sit it up?
We have two cats that way around 5 kgs each. If I sit those on their hind legs and sit them up, their heads would be about 50, perhaps 55 centimeters from the ground.
A rabbit that stretches a meter should weigh a hell of a lot more than 7.7 kgs.
<Sylvester the cat>
No, I am quite sure it is simply a mouse.
Gets punched out.
I have a cat that weighs about 8kg (18lbs), a bit more than this rabbit. He’s big, but that rabbit looks like it’s twice his size. My cat looks positively scrawny in comparison. Maybe the guy holding the rabbit is a midget, or it’s a seriously distorted picture, or the rabbit is all fur, but a creature that huge looking should not be only 7.7kg.
Man, one of those would make a socko BBQ done on a spit and basted with an appropriate sauce. At Easter, I’m doing cabrito that way but one of these instead would be ineffably kewel.
Perhaps it is a measurement of floor to extended eartip? That might make the weight more plausible. I’m thinking we are seeing media spin, to make us “ooo” and “ahhh”. (Though I also agree that it seems to be rather light.)
I want one, Too! I’ll name him Stu. Rabbit Stu.
It also says the ears are 21cm long. Using that for scale, the rabbit as shown is about 80cm tall, sitting down and measuring to the tip of the ears. The 1-meter measurement must be to the tip of the outstretched hind legs.
Still, I agree it looks too big to be a 7.7kg (= 17 lb) rabbit.
It looks like the real-life version of Hutch, the “were-Wallace”, from The Curse of the Were-Rabbit.
I tried to resist, but…
<obAnya>
Bunnies aren’t just cute like everybody supposes
They got them hoppy legs and twitchy little noses
And waht’s with all the carrots?
What do they need such good eyesight for anyway?
Bunnies, bunnies, it must be bunnies!
</obAnya>
Brian
(or maybe midgets)
Farked or not, instead of bouncing around leaving a trail of chocolate chip sized pellets all over the carpet, that thing would probably leave behind a trail of Chocolate Whoppers.