Animal Planet's "Dragons"

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 05:51:23 GMT, "Marc L." <master.cougar@gmail.com>
scribed into the ether:

>dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca (David Alex Lamb) wrote in
>news:d24d68$q72$1@knot.queensu.ca:
>
>> Always? Are you sure? ISTR two other methods (a) grassfires --
>> which I admit has to be considered a tool and (b) scaring them
>> with horses and other noise.
>>
>
> Well, if they used horses, you can say they used a tool. I'm
>pretty sure they used spears too. By the time they had horses, they
>had already developed the spear and the bow and arrow.

IIRC, by the time they had horses, they had guns. I could be way off base
there, but I seem to recall that horses as riding animals (and not food)
was something introduced to them by the europeans.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 06:50:53 GMT, phy <phy00x@yahoo.com> scribed into the
ether:

>"Marc L." <master.cougar@gmail.com> wrote in
>news:Xns9626BF6ABA0Amastercougarhotmailc@207.35.177.134:
>
>> phy <phy00x@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> news:Xns9625731812B4Cphy00xyahoocom@69.28.186.121:
>>
>>> Matt Frisch <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in
>>> news:5rt14155tm7t8pspfi0tn58576hithoq86@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> . All birds can and do use thermals to stay aloft to reduce the
>>>> effort they put into it...
>>>
>>> Wrong.
>>>
>>> -phy
>>>
>>
>> Other than hummingbirds, can you share with us those birds that
>> can't? [NOTE: I am not stating that you are wrong, just want to
>> know.]
>>
>
>I would be happy to. To name a few, chickens, crows, and, amazingly even
>albotrosses. http://www.paulnoll.com/Oregon/Birds/Avian-flight.html

With the exception of Hummingbirds, all birds glide to some extent when
flying. As a rule, the smaller the bird, the shorter the distance it can
glide and the faster it sinks. For example, a domestic pigeon descends
about 33 feet during a glide of approximately 295 feet; a Golden Eagle can
glide 558 feet with the same loss in height.

Is the thing I noticed. Using air currents to keep aloft more than straight
aerodynamics would allow would have to be second nature, even if some of
them are just not very good at it.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 04:27:22 -0500, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net>
scribed into the ether:

>"Marc L." <master.cougar@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:Xns9626D1C71E67mastercougarhotmailc@207.35.177.134...
>> "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net> wrote in
>> news:5NWdnWjevbHkJdjfRVn-og@comcast.com:
>>
>> > It takes a rather significant continued show of force to run them
>> > off, dude.
>>
>> You have obviously never seen lions in the wild.
>
>Yes, I have. Been within feet of them. In the wild(not a zoo or
>something). Kruger National Park, in South Africa. They are UN-AFRAID of
>humans. It's like we're not even there.

Those aren't really wild lions, they are lions who have become accustomed
to those shiny, smelly, loud, moving man-boxes.

Truly wild lions, along with almost every other animal in the world, runs
like hell at the sight of men, unless they have good reason not to
(defending food, defending young topping *that* list).

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 03:19:26 -0500, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net>
scribed into the ether:

>"Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
>news:9rac4117jon7a3fpgivm6muj2gsb3nu9lb@4ax.com...
>> >To find more simple examples, there are plenty of insects that kill other
>> >insects many times their size. There's a tarantula hunting wasp, for
>> >example(don't know the name of that one).
>>
>> http://www.desertusa.com/mag01/sep/papr/thawk.html
>>
>> Are you familiar with a 20 inch tarantula living in north america? I'm
>>not.
>
>No, but I am familiar with a variety of the insects in that family that are
>not 2 inches long,

I read through a half dozen sites on wasps that hunt tarantulas, including
the state/national park sites in 5 different states, and not a single one
mentioned a species of wasp that was notably smaller than ~2 inches.

Here is my favorite line:
Tarantula hawks, so named for their huge size and hawk-like hunting
strength, hunt tarantula spiders.

Apparently there is an amazon variety which can grow in excess of 5 inches,
making it a primary predator to the Bird Eating Spider, which at 10 inches,
is the largest in the world. I suppose you must somehow enjoy being
constantly and repeatedly FACTUALLY INCORRECT (when *are* you going to
change that .sig?), because there really is no other explanation.

Has it ever occured to you to learn something, and *then* post on it? It
would be a refreshing change from your past history of "make something up,
and then refuse to learn about it when proven wrong".

>as well, and predate spiders that are many times their
>size, as noted above. "Many times" is key there, chief.

Your actual assertion was 10 times. You have yet to come up with a single
example of this actually occuring, despite your further insistance that
there were "plenty" of such animals.

We'll soften it up for you, Jeff...find an animal that regularly preys on
something FIVE times its own size. Bet you can't.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
news:r5ad4159g1p787p87h4hfeu4n7nfg79vnk@4ax.com...
> >Yes, I have. Been within feet of them. In the wild(not a zoo or
> >something). Kruger National Park, in South Africa. They are UN-AFRAID
of
> >humans. It's like we're not even there.
>
> Those aren't really wild lions, they are lions who have become accustomed
> to those shiny, smelly, loud, moving man-boxes.

I guess there are no more wild lions, then, because there are no lions that
have not become accustomed to shiny, smell, loud, moving man-boxes. In
areas that humans and lions might co-exist, if the humans have moved in,
lions that encroach on humans without their permission are killed.

Have you got this vision of lions simply wandering around Africa? My oh my.
Ok, free clue, buddy, those helicopter shots of vast plains of herds of
antelope being stalked by prides of wild lions that you see on animal planet
and the like, those are ALL taken in game reserves, of which there are
plenty in Africa. People generally don't live in those game reserves. How
do I know this? I lived in Africa for 5 years, so "been there, done that".

> Truly wild lions, along with almost every other animal in the world, runs
> like hell at the sight of men, unless they have good reason not to
> (defending food, defending young topping *that* list).

You know not from whence you speak. Lions tend to regard humans as prey,
nothing more. If they aren't hungry, you're safe as long as you don't get
close enough for them to swat you. They are VERY laid back animals, truth
be told, acting a lot like social house cats. They'll ignore you most of
the time, sleep a lot, and generally be lazy, until it comes time to catch
and eat you.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Matt Frisch <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in
news:9u8d411f2dl9opq3untc1vjene1j791etk@4ax.com:

> That's over a relatively small area, but is probably a decent
> sampling. Lion deaths are not very frequent, it would seem.
>

Thank you for supplying this info.

--
Marc

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:JKSdnRg9WtJRc9vfRVn-pQ@comcast.com...
> Species viability is one way of putting it. That aside, Humpty originally
> referred to a defense against prey being too easy to kill. Fecundity is a
> survival mechanism for a species, not a "defense against being too easy to
> kill". It does nothing to prevent or slow down what Humpty claims it is a
> defense against. Once again, Sooper Jeenyus finds himself incapable of
> using anything resmbling precision language.

No, I said that if a species was too easy to kill, it would develop a
defense against that. One defense is massive breeding. I'm sorry you don't
know these things.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ffadnUduterkmNrfRVn-tQ@comcast.com...
> "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:JKSdnRg9WtJRc9vfRVn-pQ@comcast.com...
>> Species viability is one way of putting it. That aside, Humpty
>> originally
>> referred to a defense against prey being too easy to kill. Fecundity is
>> a
>> survival mechanism for a species, not a "defense against being too easy
>> to
>> kill". It does nothing to prevent or slow down what Humpty claims it is
>> a
>> defense against. Once again, Sooper Jeenyus finds himself incapable of
>> using anything resmbling precision language.
>
> No, I said that if a species was too easy to kill, it would develop a
> defense against that.

Yes, exactly. A defense against being too easy to kill is something that
makes them less easy to kill, by definition.

> One defense is massive breeding. I'm sorry you don't
> know these things.

I know that you are a moronic weasel, Humpty, and have difficulties with the
English language.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Matt Frisch <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in
news😱p9d41l3t9fse965obeskc7nmdc4c9qhsb@4ax.com:

> IIRC, by the time they had horses, they had guns. I could be way
> off base there, but I seem to recall that horses as riding animals
> (and not food) was something introduced to them by the europeans.
>

True. And they didn't really have horses for food, until the
Europeans came by. The native horses died out more than 10 000 years
ago, I don't recall exactly when, but I remember understanding that
it happened about the same time the socalled sabertooth tiger
disapeared, before the North American "Indians" came to North
America.

--
Marc

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

phy <phy00x@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:Xns96269192D10Dphy00xyahoocom@69.28.186.121:

> I would be happy to. To name a few, chickens, crows, and,
> amazingly even albotrosses.

Really? Chickens, Ostriches and Emus I had no doubt about, but
crows? Cool.

--
Marc

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Matt Frisch <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in
news:nu9d41l0i5pa1fip5l6hplrn83j3p3do70@4ax.com:

> With the exception of Hummingbirds, all birds glide to some
> extent when flying.

Yes, but he spoke of birds who use thermals to extend their
flight, not of gliding.

--
Marc

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net> wrote in
news:SeydndSym46J7dvfRVn-vQ@comcast.com:

> However, all that aside, you dismiss this predator's ability to
> kill a 3000 pound whale as if it were nothing worth mentioning.

More dishonesty. No one has done this aledged dismissal you keep
mentioning Jeff. You made the claim that Polar Bears routinely attack
prey ten times their size and always win. We provided evidence that
you erred gravely with that statement. Now you throw these dishonest
statements, yet again, to try to divert attention from the erroneous
statement you made. Cheating again Jeff, not nice. And, since we have
good memories, and Google, you cannot get away with it.

--
Marc

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote in news:_
5ydnXjd9tj87NvfRVn-iA@comcast.com:

> Prove that 3300 lbs is the weight of an average male beluga whale.
>

Well, I did find a web site that states the average beluga whale
as a mass of 1 500Kg, so he's not wrong on that count.

--
Marc

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Marc L." <master.cougar@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96265F41528B9mastercougarhotmailc@207.35.177.134...
> "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote in news:_
> 5ydnXjd9tj87NvfRVn-iA@comcast.com:
>
>> Prove that 3300 lbs is the weight of an average male beluga whale.
>>
>
> Well, I did find a web site that states the average beluga whale
> as a mass of 1 500Kg, so he's not wrong on that count.

Yes, and I have seen web sites that indicate this is the high end of a range
of weights. Which is the real deal?

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net> wrote in
news:KsCdnZG1IsrH5dvfRVn-ug@comcast.com:

> Technically, you're trying to prove me wrong with things I said
> that don't match up to what you think they said. Oh well. Your
> loss...
>

Jeff, you lose. You did state, "There are predators that
routinely prey on animals ten times their size and always win." When
asked to name ONE, you replied, "Polar Bears." So now, when we point
that out, as in:
"Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:N9adnS5dl7ZWptvfRVn-vA@comcast.com...
> "Polar bears often feed on whales that outweigh the bears by that
> ratio at least"


You reply, "Feed on" trying to make us believe you meant they
eat whales, not prey on them, except, well, we remember what you
wrote Jeffy boy, so you lose.
--
Marc

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 07:48:34 -0500, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net>
scribed into the ether:

>"Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
>news:379d4111h05o0o1aocrv9sj10j3hhnum6k@4ax.com...
>> >A pride of lions trumps a pack of hyenas, almost without exception.
>>
>> False. Whoever has more is the one who trumps, given a 3:1 advantage to
>the
>> hyenas to account for the extra size of a dominant male lion.
>
>Well then your own statement is untrue by your own words. It's not simply
>whoever has more, it's whoever has more against the spread(or however you
>want to phrase that). If it were an even match, there would be even
>numbers.

An individual hyena is not a match for an individual lion, but there are
many, many more hyenas than lions. A *large* pride of lions is 15 members.
Hyena packs have been documented into the 100+ range. The only thing that
keeps lions from being extinct is the overwhelming size of dominant male
lions. If not for them, hyenas would rob the lions blind, and kill them
frequently.

>> >Elephants are not prey of pretty much anything, but that doesn't make
>them
>> >the top of the food chain in any way,
>>
>> Irrelevant. You don't need to be on the top of the food chain to threaten
>> someone else's existance. Elephants kill lions. Elephants are a threat to
>> lions.
>
>Irrelevant. Elephants only kill lions dumb enough to piss them off. They
>are not a THREAT to lions in the same way that lions are a threat to
>antelope. They will defend themselves, but they will NOT seek out lions to
>kill.

Yes, they will. They do not stalk lions in the way that lions stalk food,
but they will kill them if they get the chance. It's not "That lion pissed
me off, I'm gonna kill 'em!", it's "There's a lion sniffing around our
watering hole, let's see if we can stamp it".

>> Position on the food chain is still not relevant. Your position is that
>> "there is no creature in their ecosystem that can pose a significant
>> ongoing threat to them in any way". The FACTUALLY CORRECT position is that
>> many animals kill lions and are thus a threat to them.
>
>SIGNIFICANT ONGOING THREAT. It's a phrase that has meaning. There is
>NOTHING in their ecosystem that provides a significant enough threat to
>lions to cause them to pack up and leave.

Except for crocodiles, leopards, hyenas, elephants, water buffalo, and
hippopotomii. If you don't include all of those, then no, there are no
threats to lions.

From one of the links below:

The male lion will even occasionally go out of their way to kill clan
matriarchs since hyenas are major predators of lion cubs

But that's not a threat, according to you.

>> >You're implying that hyenas are at the top of the food chain in africa?
>>
>> If I was, then I was in error...what I meant to do was to state it
>> outright:
>>
>> Hyenas are at the top of the food chain in Africa.
>
>You're amusing.

And you're a moron who dwells on 30-years-obsolete stereotypes without
regard to facts.

>> > A scavenger, top of the food chain? I guess that's right up there with
>> >calling filter feeders predators... 😉
>>
>> Hyenas are not scavengers, you ignorant fool. If you consider a Hyena a
>> scavenger, then you also *MUST* consider a lion a scavenger, because
>> behavior-wise, there is almost no difference between them.
>
>Hyenas can kill, and do kill, but a vast majority of their food comes from
>scavenging and from driving animals off their kills.

I defy you to find a single citation which backs up your claims.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/animals/features/304feature1.shtml
http://www.bio.davidson.edu/people/vecase/Behavior/Spring2004/roles/Food,%20Hunting,%20and%20Predation.htm
http://www.awf.org/wildlives/141
http://www.lioncrusher.com/animal.asp?animal=75
http://www.southafrica-travel.net/Tiere/e_hyaen.htm
http://www.ultimatefieldguide.com/spotted_hyena.htm
http://www.zambiatourism.com/travel/wildlife/hyena.htm
I could come up with another couple HUNDRED sites which back up *my* claim,
but I trust my point is made.

The second one is my favorite. See the part where lions initiate 70% of the
meat grabs? That is, they steal food from the animals who did the actual
hunting: The Hyena.

When are you going to get tired of being so stupid, and so wrong, so often?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
news:g9hd41966je7iaduvt291c0n1p0kvqibr9@4ax.com...
> An individual hyena is not a match for an individual lion, but there are
> many, many more hyenas than lions. A *large* pride of lions is 15 members.
> Hyena packs have been documented into the 100+ range. The only thing that
> keeps lions from being extinct is the overwhelming size of dominant male
> lions. If not for them, hyenas would rob the lions blind, and kill them
> frequently.

Ignoring, of course, that so many hyenas is a troop, and hyenas hunt and
work in packs, a troop consisting of multiple packs. They can't coordinate
attacks of 100 a pop, chief, so it doesn't matter if there are 100 hyenas in
the area, they can only bring about a dozen to bear on a given target at
once!

> Yes, they will. They do not stalk lions in the way that lions stalk food,
> but they will kill them if they get the chance. It's not "That lion pissed
> me off, I'm gonna kill 'em!", it's "There's a lion sniffing around our
> watering hole, let's see if we can stamp it".

Let me see if I can't make this clear for you: Elephants will defend
themselves, and that includes anything that they percieve as a threat to
what they need to do. An elephant charged our car while we were observing
their actions at a water hole, just like you said. We hadn't done anything
except sat there near the watering hole. He tried to drive us off with an
impressive display, but came up a bit short. After he did his "I'm all
tuff" thing, he wandered back and continued his day. Were elephants like
you describe, I would not be here today.

> >SIGNIFICANT ONGOING THREAT. It's a phrase that has meaning. There is
> >NOTHING in their ecosystem that provides a significant enough threat to
> >lions to cause them to pack up and leave.
>
> Except for crocodiles, leopards, hyenas, elephants, water buffalo, and
> hippopotomii. If you don't include all of those, then no, there are no
> threats to lions.

For the THIRD time. "Significant ongoing threat". Lions are not prey to
anything, so there is no significant ongoing threat.

> From one of the links below:
>
> The male lion will even occasionally go out of their way to kill clan
> matriarchs since hyenas are major predators of lion cubs
>
> But that's not a threat, according to you.

Not to an adult, no. Except from a species survival perspective.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 14:21:39 GMT, "Marc L." <master.cougar@gmail.com>
scribed into the ether:

>"Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote in news:_
>5ydnXjd9tj87NvfRVn-iA@comcast.com:
>
>> Prove that 3300 lbs is the weight of an average male beluga whale.
>>
>
> Well, I did find a web site that states the average beluga whale
>as a mass of 1 500Kg, so he's not wrong on that count.

I found one that indicated they typically weigh 7 tons, have a 155 IQ and
can beat humans at chess.

Don't believe everything you see on the internet.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Jeff Goslin" wrote
> "David Alex Lamb" wrote
> > I've seen a Beluga in a marine park; the one I saw was fairly small as
> whales
> > go, but bigger than a dolphin. I don't recall whether it was smaller
than
> an
> > orca or larger.
>
> Yes, they are small whales, as far as whales go, but they still outweigh
> polar bears by a substantial margin(triple their weight).

Triple is being generous, but ok, lets go with triple.
What about that Ten Times comment? Shall we file it with the Only Raptors
are predators comment or will you attempt to redefine 3 to equal 10?

John

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Yo-dnXOWOr82ktrfRVn-2g@comcast.com...
> > No, I said that if a species was too easy to kill, it would develop a
> > defense against that.
>
> Yes, exactly. A defense against being too easy to kill is something that
> makes them less easy to kill, by definition.

"A" defense, you're right. That is ONE possible form of defense. Force of
numbers is another defense, and one often used by animals that find
themselves on the short end of the predatory/prey stick.

Rabbits don't breed like, well, rabbits for just fun, you know. They want
to have enough left over from all the predators that eat them to propagate
the species. It's a defense mechanism, nothing more.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Matt Frisch <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 14:21:39 GMT, "Marc L." <master.cougar@gmail.com>
> scribed into the ether:
>> Well, I did find a web site that states the average beluga whale
>>as a mass of 1 500Kg, so he's not wrong on that count.
>
> I found one that indicated they typically weigh 7 tons, have a 155 IQ and
> can beat humans at chess.

Is that a beluga whale, or is that Jeff Goslin?
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd4e3t7.d2c.bradd+news@szonye.com...
> Matt Frisch <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 14:21:39 GMT, "Marc L." <master.cougar@gmail.com>
>> scribed into the ether:
>>> Well, I did find a web site that states the average beluga whale
>>>as a mass of 1 500Kg, so he's not wrong on that count.
>>
>> I found one that indicated they typically weigh 7 tons, have a 155 IQ and
>> can beat humans at chess.
>
> Is that a beluga whale, or is that Jeff Goslin?

You are being overly generous with the latter two traits.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd4e3t7.d2c.bradd+news@szonye.com...
> Matt Frisch <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 14:21:39 GMT, "Marc L." <master.cougar@gmail.com>
> > scribed into the ether:
> >> Well, I did find a web site that states the average beluga whale
> >>as a mass of 1 500Kg, so he's not wrong on that count.
> >
> > I found one that indicated they typically weigh 7 tons, have a 155 IQ
and
> > can beat humans at chess.
>
> Is that a beluga whale, or is that Jeff Goslin?

I knew I should have preemptively struck on that one. 😉

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin <autockr@comcast.net> wrote:
> No, I said that if a species was too easy to kill, it would develop a
> defense against that. One defense is massive breeding.

That's a survival strategy, not a defense. Learn what words mean.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd4e4dr.d2c.bradd+news@szonye.com...
> Jeff Goslin <autockr@comcast.net> wrote:
> > No, I said that if a species was too easy to kill, it would develop a
> > defense against that. One defense is massive breeding.
>
> That's a survival strategy, not a defense. Learn what words mean.

I guess it depends on what you're defending against. If you're defending
against the elimination of your species, it's perfectly valid to just throw
bodies at it and hope you have more bodies than your opponent can kill. It
certainly defends the species, does it not?

It is a survival strategy that has it's roots in defense of the species, not
the individual.

Running fast and for long period of time(ala antelope) is a survival
strategy as well.

Given that ANY defensive measure taken is a survival strategy by definition,
your sub-sectioning of the words is mostly useless. Is there a survival
strategy that ISN'T the defense of the species? Killing lots of prey is a
defense mechanism, from the perspective of the species. Having paralyzing
poison to immobalize your opponents is a defense mechanism, from the
persepctive of the species, even if that poison is primarily used to make
prey easier to eat.

You're so eager to play the definition game that you ignore the context of
the words in order to show that I am somehow wrong, a huge victory for you
in the eyes of the sycophants here, but one that is so phyrric that it's
hard to ignore that you've just done the precise thing you claim makes me so
stupid. Kudos, you've been so eager to prove me wrong that you ignored that
words have context.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right