Page 2 of 4
Posted: Fri Oct 07, 2005 1:23 am
The big (similar) argument my friends and I often had (and even on occasion STILL have) is Bear vs. Mountain Lion. This is especially pertinent in the Pacific Northwest where this could very well show itself. Of course, we're talking about a Grizzly and a very large Mountain Lion... neither of which could be eaten by a snake... I hope.
Posted: Fri Oct 07, 2005 6:38 am
Polar Bear vs. Alligator
PB is currently a 3-1 favorite
Over/Under - 5.5 rounds
PB by knockout - 2-1
Gator by decapitation - 7-1
PB eats Gator then explodes - 28-1
Gator chokes on recently fed chicken - 12-1
Over/Under on # of LaCoste jokes - 3.5
PB floats away on chuck of ice broken loose by global warming - 5-1
Global Warming doesn't exists - 10,000,000-1
Chances of successfully navigating an astroid field, 3,720-1
Draw - 10-1
Posted: Fri Oct 07, 2005 10:19 am
And if by chance, that Alligator cheats and kills the Polar Bear, don't eat the liver. It's poisonous due to high concentrated levels of Vitamin A.
The things I learn by watching "LOST".
Posted: Fri Oct 07, 2005 12:30 pm
zach wrote:The big (similar) argument my friends and I often had (and even on occasion STILL have) is Bear vs. Mountain Lion. This is especially pertinent in the Pacific Northwest where this could very well show itself. Of course, we're talking about a Grizzly and a very large Mountain Lion... neither of which could be eaten by a snake... I hope.
Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2005 2:51 am
of course, in the long run the alligator beats the polar bear, when the polar ice is gone, and there's plenty of warm water... but I will admit that's not a direct fight.
Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2005 8:28 am
zach wrote:The big (similar) argument my friends and I often had (and even on occasion STILL have) is Bear vs. Mountain Lion.
Yes, with the whole "stand on it's hind legs and be twelve feet tall and take big talon swipes" ability alone, I'd think a grizzly could disembowel a lion mountain's ass in no time flat. It would seem to me to be all about leverage, you see. Leverage and opportunity. I would think you'd get more of both when several feet taller than your opponent? Although, I suppose the mountain lion could kneecap the bear.
I don't suppose anyone here has experience in wrestling? We could use an experienced voice on height v. weight realities in our hypothetical battle arena that I am hereby christening, "The Pleasure Dome".
Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2005 9:42 am
Mountain Lion are straight killing machines. IMO, if anything this could end up being a draw, but I can't see a brown bear ever winning. Not even one from Kodiak Island!
Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2005 9:46 am
In wrestling, height is not always an advantage... the longer your legs are, the more there is for your opponent to shoot in and grab - thus taking you down.
However height (i.e. "length") can help when on the mat, as there is more of you your opponent has to control.
Height also gives you longer arms and legs, allowing you to shoot from farther away. Long arms also allow you to play better defense, keeping an opponent at bay.
The key to defeating a taller wrestler is to use your quickness to get inside of his/her reach and get high on his/her legs.
Weight does go a long way - as usually if you weigh more, you are stronger. It is also more you can tire an opponent out by keeping your weight on him/her. The more you weigh, the more effort it takes to move you around.
The key to defeating a wrestler that weighs a significant amount more than you is positioning and leverage. Use your opponent’s weight against him with moves such as the fireman’s carry.
Then, if you are a mountain lion, bit the crap out of that grizzly bear when it is down.
But from a strictly wrestling standpoint, I would go with the grizzly bear due to the greater strength and size
Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 5:30 am
John wrote:I once spent an entire fourth of July party arguing whether a polar bear could take an alligator in a fair fight. Obviously the polar bear is the superior hunter by a factor of a thousand, but the other guests at the party (Floridians) could not conceive of a higher class of predator than an alligator. It was quite clear to me the first time I saw some chubby Australian dude in cargo shorts wrestle an alligator into submission and feed it chickens by hand that the alligator was only to be feared if you're a stupid Florida kid riding his bike home from Disney World with your shoelaces untied. For the rest of us, there can be no question that the polar bear reigns supreme. A polar bear can neither be fed chickens by hand, wrestled into submission, nor eaten by a goddamn snake.
But do they keep walking after they've died? Polar bears are mammals. They're probably wilier than alligators, and might have a better chance of doing things like removing food from traps. They'll definitely do better given a home field advantage, since alligators are cold blooded.
But alligators have been drifting silently through swamps since before there were dinosaurs. The only way to defeat one is to be able to grab its jaws, hold them shut (they're very strong only in the biting-down direction) and flip it over. Perhaps your non-snake-vulnerable polar bear could do that. They do pretty well against those half-dead spawning salmon and those fearsome berries up there in Santa's Candyland. Staple of their diet: baby seals. Terrifying.
How the two would fare against each other is worth thinking about, though, given that alligators do eat other bears that don't hide in snow. So do snakes.
And the experts say: polar bears = delicate
nwheather, coy and charming wrote:Heh, I just noticed the 'saucy' bit. I suppose I should take that as a compliment...?
I forgot: are pythons biters or squeezers?
Yes, and both. When hunting, they'll constrict. When alarmed, or just pissed off, they'll chomp. Non-venomous, which is quite the consolation when you're dying of blood-loss and septicemia in the jungles of Myanmar (formerly Burma).
Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:52 pm
John wrote:fear not! These otters can defintely "eat snakes".
[Shatner]Arg...don't...want...to know...can't...help...asking anyway...[/Shatner]
What in blazes is that
supposed to mean???
I still want an answer to this question. Especially if it's bullshit silliness. Ppbbbtth.
'Coy'. If you described me as such to anyone who knows me, you'd have to resuscitate them after the laughing fit.
Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 4:27 pm
"As you see, sir, the flooding is extensive. Hundreds of square miles."
"Ahhh, hell, I've seen that in Houston, just on a smaller scale."
"That may be true, sir, but reports are that snakes and alligators are down there, too."
"We have snakes in Texas! Rattlesnakes! Way worse than the moccasins they have."
"Poisonous snakes are poisonous snakes, sir."
"We eat the goddamn things! Rattlesnake roundups! I've been to them. Tastes like chicken if you roast 'em just right over an open fire."
"Are you suggesting those people down there eat snakes, sir?"
"Why the hell not? If we can do it in Texas, they can do it in Louisiana."
"Sir, does a French queen named Marie Antoinette ring any bells?"
"How many times do I have to tell you, son, don't talk to me about those goddamn Frogs! I hate those bastards! Anything they have to say, I don't want to hear it!"
"All right, sir, let's assume they're willing to eat snakes. How can they roast them? How can they build fires?"
"There's wood all over the place down there! Look at it! And all those roofs are dry. Let 'em get up there and have at it!"
"But, sir, the roofs will burn if they do that."
"So what? We're talking emergency, son! E-m-e-r - you get my point! Those houses are shot to hell, anyway. What's to save?"
"All right, sir - assuming they can roast snakes on the roofs that aren't submerged, what should they wash it down with? The water down there is polluted."
"Iodine! Let 'em put iodine in it. That's what they taught us in the Army. I served, you know, honorably discharged."
"Yes, sir, but I doubt many of them have iodine handy."
"It ought to be in every damn medicine cabinet down there!"
"Sir, I think it's safe to assume the medicine cabinets are blown away or under water."
"Can't we drop some down to them? An airlift kind of thing, like in Berlin."
"Yes, sir, an iodine airlift·and how about some marshmallows to roast along with the snakes?"
"Marshmallows! Son, that's brilliant! Everybody's gonna love that idea!"
Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:45 pm
All due respect to Mountain Lions and Alligators, which are very ferocious predators and quite adept at dipatching housecats and baby squirrels and 140 pound joggers, but the Damn Polar Bear is going to munch them like Cadbury bars, to say nothing of the Kodiak Brown Bear, master of disaster, Ayatollah of Rock and Rolla!
The alligator has survived for so long because nothing else is interested in unseating its hegemony over swamp mud. And the Mountain Lion, or catamount, is a kitty-cat.
As for the other question: A young Ken Stringfellow once wrote a nasty letter to a neighborhood bully that read, in its entirety,
"Dear faggy fuck-face, I hope you eat snakes. Signed, Ken Stringfellow."
This is the most hilarious letter ever written, obviously, and caused both "FFF" and "eating snakes" to permanently enter the lexicon.
Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 11:56 pm
It would seem that this ever flourishing topic has a band of it's own.
Submitted for your approval: bearvsshark
They don't look so tough. I think I could take them.
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 6:47 am
I'll give you grizzlies. They regularly chase polar bears further north every spring. They're big, and they have machine parts inside them (true fact!), so they can eat whatever they want, even if it's locked inside an SUV hammering frenetically on the horn and wondering why the damn thing won't start. (Answer: because the grizzly ate the ignition wires while you weren't looking, yuppie camper.)
Grizzly vs. Alligator -- that'd be a fair fight.
You can paint black stripes on a polar bear and make him the referee. Or maybe they could serve drinks.
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2005 4:55 pm
The most dangerous animal on the planet (besides man, of course) is the malarial parasite. It has been responsible for 50% of all human deaths since the stone age. Although I'm not sure what effect it might have on a polar bear, a polar bear definitely could not "kick its ass".
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2005 7:31 pm
John wrote: Ayatollah of Rock and Rolla!
This is why I love you.
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:12 pm
John wrote: A young Ken Stringfellow once wrote a nasty letter to a neighborhood bully that read, in its entirety,
"Dear faggy fuck-face, I hope you eat snakes. Signed, Ken Stringfellow."
And that neighborhood bully, dear listeners, grew up to be John Morgan Roderick, beard enthusiast and ruling tyrant of the onstensibly popular "indie rock" band, The Long Winters.
And now you know....the rest of the story.
Posted: Sun Dec 04, 2005 2:54 am
anybody see the bear movie documentary thingie? I thought it was excellent. and had a lot to say about knowing a community of anything... bears are not so foreign. it's the bears you're unfamiliar with. I guess.
and anything with the f-word in it does not amuse or intimidate me. ken stringfellow or not, petty.
and I do heart ken stringfellow.
Posted: Sun Dec 04, 2005 4:29 pm
aj wrote:anybody see the bear movie documentary thingie? I thought it was excellent. and had a lot to say about knowing a community of anything... bears are not so foreign. it's the bears you're unfamiliar with. I guess.
The Grizzly Man one, or whatever it was called, where he gets eaten by the bear in the end? [I don't think it happened just that way, but I haven't actually seen it.]
Wait...the F Word doesn't amuse you?! Not at all? Plus, it is virtually impossible to take any document containing the phrase "Faggy Fuck-Face" seriously, especailly in reference to that one guy in that band we all like.
Posted: Sat Dec 24, 2005 10:52 pm