True, but my post still stands.
Cite.
One Thousand Quatloos on the Elephant.
Honey Badger! Duh!
But will a lion zombie beat a bear zombie?
Havent seen this one, shouldent have made me other thread then. lol
Sorry for the double post, I keep forgetting I cant edit my post in order to squeeze in a few dots.
But as for the topic; this is one of the closest things to a Kodiak; a Grizzly…
http://www.nfa.dept.shef.ac.uk/images/jungle-1910-11-21-Ind.jpg
They can attain the same sizes in some cases as the Kodiak; so I dont think a few Kilos here an there would matter. Also I’d like to add that lions of course; are in a whole different ball park, in terms fighting. If size was what all that mattered, than huge body builders, big; bulky an fat people would be champions of K-1 Kick boxing, champions of Boxing in general, champs of Pride fighting, champs of the Ufc and ect ect…but they are not. The people who are the elites and in prime conditioning in fighting are.
Bears can become highly obese because there main food source is basicaly unlimted if in the right reigons…of course I mean Vegatation…so since they require no struggle as a lion would against a buffalo, they can energy-effciently consume by the lodes…ergo obesity, a lion cannot become obese since he must do alot of manuel labor to just eat…via run, struggle, wrestle, pin down a animal thats 4x his weight…try telling a 600 pound obese man, in order for him to eat he has to get up an shoot the cow, skin or dessembowl the cow for the meat; clean it, organize it and cook it, I bet this person wouldent weigh as much as how hes use too just ordering in.
But anyways; I back the lion against the Kodiak on average terms, but just barley winning at 7/10 times.
(Dam you edit button!)
Oh well’s; just wanted to coverup some fundemental facts for you an mr thread starter. Get off the crack! Kodiak/Grizzlys do not average no 2,000 pounds they average 400-800 pounds, 900-1,200 are rare, an 1,300-1,500 are all unverified, an stem from hunters who would have no means of weighing them, a single man hoisting up a 2,000 pound bear? Puh-leeze. They were estimations upoun mass an dimensions, which are flawed because a 5 foot man can still be heavier than a 7 foot man; it leaves a room for error because weight can be distributed differently.
A bear can stand a chance of 50/50 against a Hippo an Elephant?
What are you guys on ex, meth; coke… what? Each can fly pass 7,000 pounds with ease…7,000>>>>>>>800 more than 6x the bears weight, which would mean 6x the power, 3x the bite from the hippo; 6 feet long horns, a hell of a reach advantage of the bear not even coming in close or near an of the elephnat using those dense as iron tusk thrashing an tossing the bear high in the air; able to pick up; up to a 1,000 pounds with his trunk lifting the bear clean off the ground an slamming him back down breaking every bone in his back/spine an skull.
A elephant, hippo; Rhino, buffalo would all shit on any bear, any day of the month.
A kodiak can take on 3 lions; What, Mountain lions??? The records of a shy 20 accounts already have lions ahead of bears by triple the amount, killing 4 grizzlys and 4 polar bears while the rest black, asiatic ect. While it cant be said the same of vice versa; no brown bear had killed a male african lion yet. (At-least on hand) Not to mention they were all what, 1 on 1’s…so that throws your retarded logic of 3 vs 1 out the window; the 2 vs 1 would have lions slaughter the giant puff ball, 3 would be impossible to contend with; let alone survive even if he tryed to run.
Match ups of cougars/pumas have also always have been reported to have bested brown bears in the past, fighting wise bears are horible at it an rely only on size…other than that; at parity big cats rape bears, even in large weight leverages the bear usualy fairs horible; only winning here an there when the arena is like setting up a fight between a sumo fighter against a feather weight boxer in a telephone booth… open arena the bear gets out gamed, out matched an out gunned by the superior killing abilitys of the big cats, the true carnivores excluding polar bears predation on only meat.
Yes… lol indeed.
Cape buffalo vs. rhino here.
It ain’t even close.
Amazing that the rhino can lift the buffalo, which probably weighs over 1500 lbs., completely off the ground.
And elephants are known rhino killers:
Chuck Norris.
lol be that it may…
I was just in a state of confusion in how small an egaletistical, in other words insecure the average person is on these type of subjects…they dont wanna show there inner weakness so they must go by bias terms of deceptive an flawed arguments.
So by his standards saying K. Bear 2,000 pounds>>>A. Lion 450 pounds…
wouldent it be like saying…
Man vs Ape/Gorlia (puned intended)
Average humans height…9 feet tall…
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/5c/Robert_Wadlow.jpg/220px-Robert_Wadlow.jpg
Average humans weight…1,320
So that would mean Humans can kill silver back gorillas every time, since Gorilas only average 320 pounds an are 5 feet, but humans are 9 feet tall an 1,320 pounds…right?
XD XD XD
Deceptive, lying bullshit, we take averages; not freaks…let alone these so call goliath bears cant in no way be verified. Geez these people, they are so insecure, they set up fantasy rosters an give pure bullshit statistics that can in no way be sceintificaly or even logicaly an basicaly confirmed.
Almost all of the statistics other than size alone; are in favor of the lion over the Kodiak.
7/10
I love this thread so much.
lol
I really dont like A…B…C logic either, since mongoose (A) can kill king cobras (B) and Bears (C) can kill mongoose in a fight; dosent mean C can kill B, since the only reason the King cobra cant usualy kill the mongoose is because the mongoose is lightning fast an eludes an parrys the K.C’s venom, the bear wouldent be able to dodge the venom being spit in his face or a dash an bite.
Hence the ABC logic with lions and bears; bears are bigger but do not hunt bigger game, lions can single handedly take down a full grown bull bufallo; there arent any records of bears replicating that feat with a bull bison, only calfs, since like buffalo they are in herds or groups the bear doesnt know how to out flank or draw out a buffalo properly without the whole herd just ram-shacking him an beating him to a pulp of his life; no, the bear is not an expert in killing huge herbivores other than the occaisonal moose, who is less formidable than 1/5th the heavy hitters the lion rutinely takes on.
In other words; the bear is bigger, but no necisarily stronger, the bone desnity showed an equal amount of distibution of density, having the bear in some places stronger bones, while the lion in other places stronger bones, but both placements only off by a fraction; basicaly both would be able to endure wacks from the other, there is no easy bone breaking on lions; since lions can wrestle an bring down animals that are twice the bears weights an power.
The bear has over the lion…
-Longer claws
-Heavier weight/size=more power if the bear is signifcantly larger by 500 pounds.
-Bi-pedal=Can be bad since your sense of gravity is diminished (easyer to knock over)
Thats it really, but his weapons are desiged for killing (Specificaly), when we analyze his killing methods on his predation feats, we see he does not in no way kill as the fabled stories or hear say internet talk an assumption suggest he did, he does not bash in skulls, or box at all, he wrestles an bites alot with the occaisonal swipe, using weight…also his artilery’s are not made for fighting but are mere tools, digging for clams an stashing food are the primary cultivations of his claws, in being so they are deadly no doubt; but thats like trying to compare a construction worker who brings a pick, an shovel; of course you can kill some one with a pick an shovel (Tools) but things that are more specific for killing in comparison are more effective an are what they are made for, hence a spartan who comes with a sword an shield would be more effective at killing, or in other words…
Tool=Nail gun
Real weapon=Shot gun
Both can kill, but both are designed for two different things.
The lion has over the bear…
-Bigger teeth/Fangs= More efficent/faster kill.
-Razor sharp retracable claws= that cling, an can hold onto better.
-Bigger skull= for a harder bite/breaking bones, feet, paws on the first get go.
-Faster= In pure speed, agility and dexterity.
-Angled fighter= which can target low an high body parts.
-Has more fighting experince=lives in social groups that range from 10-30
I dought the Kodiack can truely out muscle the lion on average bouts, for the lion on more then one occaison has over powered an out gamed the Kodiaks superior in that department of strength via size an weight, the Polar bear…
1.)
2.)
. lion kills polar bear and lion attacks another polar bear 1955 By Alfred Court.[Book]Pages 131-132,
Although it is some, the day of the arisen accident to Artis, the repetition extended itself to noon. For five hours of clock Anton and me had lived in the cage to the big cats. One will believe me maybe if I assert that we in went out exhausted, broken fatigue. The next day this lut the turn of the tigers, then I practiced alternation: a day the lions, a day the tigers. The constant concern of the tamer has 'to be first to assure itself that every beast perfectly possesses l’a.b.c. work that it will have to execute. That obtain, it can risk “the mixture”. First the lions and the meet tigers, but that demanded a months and half of repetitions, then the leopards, the Danish dogs, at last the bears of the Himalayas. In the month of August, I began, as early as delivery, the training of the six polar bears. To the first essay of “mixes” the one of them was égorgé by a lion. It immediately was replaced, thus besides that the aggressor that dut to yield his place to another lion less hargneux,
Another lion attacks a polar bear…
On the big pyramid, a white bear, neighbor of a lion mordit the latter, the lion jumps on the bear, both of them ran down of their perchoir, rolled to the ground and immediately a tiger jumped them over. Instantly Drilled e burst, with his habitual music of blows of mouth, of roarings, of hilarious claws the air. Helped of Schultz that I had taken with me in the cage, I arrived to bring back peace.
http://alfred.court.free.fr/lacageauxfauves.htm
3.)
4.) lion kills polar bear Louis Roth, forty years with jungle killers, [Book]
page 204-205.
But then again ABC comes into play again, but 7/10 is a well placed opinion.
Oh an following up on my last post about A B C logic…
If we were to take it into consideration, then…
(Italian newspaper archive)
Polar bear kills Kodiak…
So since the lion as I showed in my last post to be able to win out more against the polar bear, an by historical records shows us that Lion>>>Polar bear, then the over all take (On average) is…
L>>>P>K
lol an of course this is out of the norm, since the thread starter only likes mentioning the raritys an titans…heres just a glimpse of the record breaking world title holder of the Artic King…
If the polar bear has a suitable tempeture area, (well below freezing) that caters to his natrual state aiding his heat stroke tendacys in normal humidity’s; I think the Polar bear would out muscle any size kodiak an if both are adament an willing for the fight, the Polar bear will reign supreme over his brown cousins the kodiak an grizzly…any day.
It’s the gift that keeps on giving.
Yup
The verfications of these titans have yet to be verified, the dimensions, measurments; and scaling havent been compared, but the photo evidence contradicts the claims; lets anaylze a few mis-conceptions here…
The so called 2,000 pound bear Named Goliath…
What bugs me, is that there was also a few california grizzly bears that were said to be 2,200 pounds; yet no verfication other than a article… but what I find funny is; how this record holder was managed to land percisly on the big 2,000…not 2,023…or 2,088…you know numbers that protain accuratecy; why do all the bears weights above the verified ones, are landing on solid numbers, every time I weighed my self last year, I never once landed once on 200 or 220 pounds, I was 213; 202, 217…sheesh all sorts of numbers but never managed to land on a solid number…how is it we have not only a few; but alot of bears landing on ludacris high numbers such as 1,500… on the dot… lol Pure bullshit.
Not to mention; Goliath in that picture is on a pavement thats 2-3 feet higher then the man; an only slightly taller…while Simba who is only 826 pounds, who is on the same level as this man an is the same height…
Yet in mass simba is almost on par with goliath? How the hell does that work out? He would need to be 2x bigger than the lion in mass, since the bear has thick fur through all out all his body that increases his mass by 30%…an still with simbas strap fur; the lion looks on par? lol Yeah right, more like Goliath was only around 1,200-1,400 pounds at best.
I’ve seen countless of trophy hunting an record breaking bears; an the hunters always take there photos in the back of the bear, which gives the distance effect of making the bear seem bigger, a man could do that to a 10 pound house cat an make him seem bigger by a 1,000 pounds to a person, as long as he is farther away from a camera, this bear shot in turkey was only 301 kg (662 pounds)…
http://s52.radikal.ru/i137/1301/0f/d52ad2ea134e.jpg
http://s017.radikal.ru/i431/1301/58/326274e2acf5.jpg
Even he ^ looks on par with Goliath the 2,000 pound bear in mass; huh…the truth is, none can be verified…next video proof should be the next creditable state while weighing them, at-least that will clear up any confusion of there true weights an sizes so they just pump out bullshit for publicty; shit any one can do that…look, check out this two ton (5,000 pound) african lion; look at the size of the head, its bigger than the mans whole body…
http://en.rian.ru/images/16554/53/165545349.jpg
Is it real? Yeah; right, Bullshit.
Mommy, please make it stop.
You could make it stop you know…how you might ask?
Dont click on it.
XD
Well, we know the Kodiak can slaughter our human champion…