Humankind sadly has lost a lot of its muscle mass over the years. If you encounter a silverback gorilla and it sees you as a threat to its tribe(I think that's what its called) consider yourself dead. They are bigger and bulkier then us.
Ants are stronger.
They may not be found too often in forests of Congo etc but the lions distribution pretty much covers all of Africa. It truly is the king of Africa!
I'm pretty sure these two animals have crossed plenty of times before in the past. probably not often enough to capture on TV though
Thanks for just helping my argument. You have shown that lions covered even more of Africa than I initially thought! And yet you still think that not one of these lions have roamed close to a forest and met a gorilla over a few million years.
You may notice you use the present tense in your original claim. You may also notice that you are using the past tense in your second statement.
Are you also claiming that the TV was invented a few million years ago? Because that is also the logical implication of the combined statements if we want to wave away the grammatical inconsistencies.
In my opinion you are merely being intellectually dishonest. But this is not how science works. You make a precise statement. You amend it. But you don't pretend your modification of position is your original position.
This is the end of this discussion though, because I do not believe you can see the difference. Otherwise you would have made the connection yourself.
While a gorilla might get within sight of a lion by coming to the edge of the jungle, it seems doubtful that they ever fought in the wild.
Lions roam the open plains where their natural prey live. Gorillas live in the jungle where their food can be found. A gorilla might wander to the edge of the jungle & be seen by a lion, but he would not wander far from the jungle. I wonder if lions ever get near the edge of the plains.
I would be amazed if a lion ever attacked a gorilla even if it came lose enough to be seen. Predators did not attack rabbits when they were introdued to Australia, due to their not being familiar prey. The rabbit population grew to become quite a problem. I would be even more amazed if the gorilla did not avoid an encounter.
What I wonder about is whether they ever met in an arena & were forced to fight.
No I didn't, in fact I even used the word "past" in my claim!
"I'm pretty sure these two animals have crossed plenty of times before in the past. probably not often enough to capture on TV though"
Don't be covering up your mistakes with stupid statements.
.
So they had TV in the 19th century?
I'm pretty sure these two animals have crossed plenty of times before in the past. probably not often enough to capture on TV though
Lions are pack hunters so if they're hungry enough they might take on anything. The females hunt, the males wait around to have fresh food delivered unless it's really scarce.I would be amazed if a lion ever attacked a gorilla even if it came lose enough to be seen.
Australia is a strange ecosystem, having separated from Asia and being left to its own gene pool. Its largest carnivore was the thylacine (now extinct thanks to European colonists), a predatory marsupial not much larger than a coyote or jackal. They were killed off early in the last century before their behavior was well studied, but I would imagine they'd have a hard time bringing down an emu and probably couldn't come close to killing one of the larger kangaroo species. Who knows if they were fast enough to catch a rabbit!Predators did not attack rabbits when they were introdued to Australia, due to their not being familiar prey. The rabbit population grew to become quite a problem.
Of course gorillas are pack animals too. If one lion ran into a tribe of gorillas, he'd better just run! If it was one-on-one and they were out in the savannah on the lion's territory, the lion might prevail. But in the gorilla's territory, the forest, he'd just climb the nearest tree. Lions are one of the few felid species that are not adept climbers; their claws don't even retract.I would be even more amazed if the gorilla did not avoid an encounter.
Perhaps they would whisper, "How about you and me join forces and take down some of those scrawny humans who put us here?"What I wonder about is whether they ever met in an arena & were forced to fight.
Lions are one of the few felid species that are not adept climbers; their claws don't even retract.
About twice the size of the largest jackals - wolf sized.Fraggle said:Its largest carnivore was the thylacine (now extinct thanks to European colonists), a predatory marsupial not much larger than a coyote or jackal.
Hmm. Wonder where I got that bit of misinformation. Thanks for the correction.The first part is correct but . . . .
The Wikipedia article on felids says that they all have retractable claws, it's one of the hallmarks of the family. It's just that cheetahs are one of a few species in which the claws are still visible when retracted.. . . . cheetahs who are the only cats that do not have retractable claws.
Hmm. Wonder where I got that bit of misinformation. Thanks for the correction.
An interesting thought about Tigers & I think it applies to lions. They have very little endurance & try ot sneak close to prey before attacking. They have to catch prey with a short fast sprint & a final leap.