Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

So This Guy Jumps In With a Tiger @ Bronx Zoo...


Anybodyhome

Recommended Posts

Guy makes a conscious decision to jump from the train into the tiger's den at the zoo. Get some of these lines:

"...I wanted to be one with the tiger..."

"...despite his serious injuries, he was able to pet the tiger before zookeepers came to his rescue..."

"...his leap was definitely not a suicide attempt, but a desire to be one with the tiger..."

Being "one with the tiger" does not mean "being course #1 for the tiger."

Least the tiger could have done was rip this guy's 'nads off so he won't be allowed to pollute the population of mankind with any offspring for the rest of his life.

http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/3d281c11a96b4ad082fe88aa0db04305/Article_2012-09-22-Bronx%20Zoo-Tiger%20Mauling/id-175c8806442141eca5904e21da7a55ba

Link to comment
Share on other sites

glad to hear they didn't do anything to the tiger. Always pisses me off when you hear stories of hikers or campers in the back country that get attacked by cougars or bears or whatever and then they gather up a posse of people and kill the animal...you know...like it was the animal's fault

Link to comment
Share on other sites

glad to hear they didn't do anything to the tiger. Always pisses me off when you hear stories of hikers or campers in the back country that get attacked by cougars or bears or whatever and then they gather up a posse of people and kill the animal...you know...like it was the animal's fault

There is a very good reason they do this. Humans aren't natural prey for these animals. Well cougars will stalk about anything, but Bears and Wolves will generally avoid humans. However, if you get an animal that attacks and eats a human, then the fear is that animal will become accustomed to humans as prey, and start stalking them. Not just in the wild, but near houses and towns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a very good reason they do this. Humans aren't natural prey for these animals. Well cougars will stalk about anything, but Bears and Wolves will generally avoid humans. However, if you get an animal that attacks and eats a human, then the fear is that animal will become accustomed to humans as prey, and start stalking them. Not just in the wild, but near houses and towns.

That's because they were here first and once the humans encroach upon their habitat, they must adapt to a new and different intruder. And, obviously as we all know, humans have the ability to reason and rationalize. Therefore their excuses for hunting down and killing an animal for protecting its own habitat are justified in the minds if some.

You'll recall we did the same thing to the native Americans, except instead of hunting them down and killing all of them, we herded the remaining few into "reservations."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's because they were here first and once the humans encroach upon their habitat, they must adapt to a new and different intruder. And, obviously as we all know, humans have the ability to reason and rationalize. Therefore their excuses for hunting down and killing an animal for protecting its own habitat are justified in the minds if some.

You'll recall we did the same thing to the native Americans, except instead of hunting them down and killing all of them, we herded the remaining few into "reservations."

That is not always true. Generally, when a bear or wolf attacks and eats a human, its because the animal is no longer able to go after its natural prey, usually due to age. Humans are easier to catch and kill than something like an elk or a deer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is not always true. Generally, when a bear or wolf attacks and eats a human, its because the animal is no longer able to go after its natural prey, usually due to age. Humans are easier to catch and kill than something like an elk or a deer.

Aren't you assuming the attack is based upon sustenance? I'm thinking it's more about territory and protection of that territory. Hadn't even considered the aspect of food.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aren't you assuming the attack is based upon sustenance? I'm thinking it's more about territory and protection of that territory. Hadn't even considered the aspect of food.

Yeah its mostly the food thing. The territory attacks are really rare. They had a news story a few years back about a couple hippies in Ca walking into a den of wolf pups and Not getting attacked. The pack was just focused on getting the pups the hell out of the area. That said anybody that scews with bear cubs knows what to expect.

Side note I can condense this news report:

Cincinnati scored a touchdown after the patriots fumbled the ball but were stopped by an unsportsman like conduct flag. They had to settle for a fieldgoal instead of a Touchdown. The Bengals Fans were very upset and are appealing the decison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aren't you assuming the attack is based upon sustenance? I'm thinking it's more about territory and protection of that territory. Hadn't even considered the aspect of food.

Sorry, I was out in Yellowstone recently, and the Park Rangers were talking about Bears and Wolves and that is what I was thinking of. They only go after the animals if they consumed a human or if the animal went after humans because it saw them as a food source. Incidental attacks are different. If its just a wrong place wrong time (for example a human comes between a mother and her cubs), they leave the animal alone, because its just doing what comes natural. But if they feel that the Bears start equating humans with food, they always go after it because they learned in the past thats a big problem.

One of the interesting things they discussed is how the number of Bear attacks in Yellowstone dropped dramatically once they strictly forbid humans from feeding the bears. Encroaching on their territory was less of an issue than leaving one's garbage can open. Once the Bears stopped seeing humans as a easy food source, they started going after more natural food sources, ie elk, deer, fish etc... If you get caught feeding a animal in Yellowstone, you get a $2000 fine. And if an animal is looking for food from humans, the animal gets put down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It seems the needs for the Panthers are at positions that tend to require intelligence to lift others--going from "good to great"--FS, ILB, and C--as you say. While i like Rodriguez a lot (can see the Hurricanes [Jarvis] and Panthers with a mustache player to get the fans into it)--I also like Golday (WLB?).  However, take a look at smallish Kyle Louis (Pitt).  He is known to be cerebral, but he is small (5'11" I think) and for that, I moved him lower.  But look at the different LB events at the combine--he is near the top in most of them.  I see him as a sleeper.  So if we wait until the second round, we can get a solid LB.   So what if we grab a free agent edge specialist (veteran) for pass situations and help develop Princely.  We draft FS (Oregon) first--maybe trading back to do so--I dunno.  We sign a free agent ILB and draft a rookie like Rodriguez or Louis.  In the third, we could probably find a center, like (former OT Parker from Duke) or Slaughter or Pew (may have to trade up).   So, as you say, others are fighting for Edge players, WRs, and OTs early like seagulls on the beach fighting over spilled corn chips, We sit back, grab intelligent players that make others better.  FS, ILB, and C. OT scares me more that Edge if we do this--but for those screaming for an edge--we have edge players--2 with starting experience who have had some degree of success.  JC Davis can play either T spot and he is good at pass blocking--a bit raw--but could be developmental depth that could play in a pinch. Or you could draft a solid OT with shorter arms that are driving them down into day 3--and convert them to G or C later.  Nijman and BC being re-signed could provide enough to hold down the job until a developmental OT (World, Oregon?) prepares for a shot at it.  Wagner (ND) could play LT but is probably a future RT--he is expected to be drafted early day 3.  My favorite day 3 OT sleeper?  Keagan Trost, Missouri. Great run blocker, soild pass blocker in SEC--just shorter arms.  Maybe a guard down the road, but for the time being, a T.  Not ideal, but at least you are building for the future.  
    • I'm not like most people in this thread in regards to Love. I'm not like most in regards to RBs either. I think certain ones will always be drafted in the first round because they are valued that highly. From an on-the-field perspective, they are as valued as ever; business-wise and contract-wise at times to re-up, that's where things can get tricky with valuation. That being said, Love oozes potential and makes higher-ups' mouths water. I know that he if somehow he is available at 19, he will be considered if not taken. You don't leave that type of talent on the board unless there is another compelling player of arguably equal or more value at another position of need that may have a higher priority (like maybe Sonny Styles). Now all that being said, I  don't realistically see either one of them being there at 19 according to the draftniks.
×
×
  • Create New...