# Mountain lion with deformity **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 24, 2016, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mountain-lion-with-deformity/744087 "2016-01-24T16:12:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2016, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mountain-lion-with-deformity/744087/21 "2016-01-25T18:53:46Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I agree with you: because of the nature of the statement, the probably modifies _both_ the fact at issue and the result. I thought the same thing, the only absolute I read into it was the “we all agreed” part which I assumed was a summation of a previous discussion. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2016, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mountain-lion-with-deformity/744087/22 "2016-01-25T18:57:29Z")
> [@slash2k](#): > > I’m not interested in debating it–I’m trying to figure out what your interpretation IS. I’m trying to improve my ability to read and write English, which means asking questions when I don’t understand, and I don’t understand how you are reading the given sentence to include the mistake you want him to admit. Because the assertion is: If anything else had been wrong with him, the mother would not have cared for him. And that’s simply not correct. Regardless of how you read that sentence, the poster was clearly overstating the conditions under which a mother cougar would reject a cub. As I noted in my initial response-- had the cub not had a tail, it’s highly unlikely the mother would have rejected it. In fact, one can think of any number of other deformities (missing ear, loss of sight in one eye, extra nose on his butt) that would not generally trigger a rejection response in the mother. ---
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2016, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mountain-lion-with-deformity/744087/23 "2016-01-25T19:19:54Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Because the assertion is: If anything else had been wrong with him, the mother would not have cared for him. And that’s simply not correct. > > Regardless of how you read that sentence, the poster was clearly overstating the conditions under which a mother cougar would reject a cub. As I noted in my initial response-- had the cub not had a tail, it’s highly unlikely the mother would have rejected it. In fact, one can think of any number of other deformities (missing ear, loss of sight in one eye, extra nose on his butt) that would not generally trigger a rejection response in the mother. Typically a mother will abandon or flat-out kill a baby who is unlikely to survive due to deformity, illness, or injury. > **[National Geographic](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/)** > > Explore National Geographic. A world leader in geography, cartography and exploration. But a purely cosmetic deformity is unlikely to bring that result. I think that’s what you’re arguing here. If nearwildheaven meant that the cub was healthy or not disadvantaged because of the deformity or the mother would not have raised it, then that seems accurate. To say there is “nothing else wrong” is too broad and could mean another cosmetic abnormality would lead to the cub’s neglect. So I agree with you. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mountain-lion-with-deformity/744087.md?page=1)