Yes it does, but psyche101 was quite accurate in saying that it's very simple to calculate the size of an animal from skeletal remains- the formulas devised are rigirously tested to form a blueprint that accurately details size, and in alot of animals, their sex. It's how forensic investigators are able to assist in the identification of unknown remains.

I'm not sure I understand your point there.
Are you retracting your "don't rely on simple math' statement?

You got it wrong, the calculation being discuss is the bone and muscle strenght of a 40 foot anaconda if ever one gets that big. My position is you can calculate but can't be accurate for it is a living thing, how can we be so sure?

Sorry- sick and fluey today and totally read it wrong... yet my point still stands, regardless of which point you're calculating- mathematics is an accurate way to establish proportion and hence, determine the likely size of an animal, and you can, fairly accurately, work out the maximum size a creature can reach when you combine this with information with the other contributing factors.

You are the only one challenging that here. The guy is obviously on the ball and an expert in the field. Follow some of his links, or google any fact he has produced.
Then show me an incorrect one.



I don't see one place they got in over their heads. They have consistantly produced good advice and fact after fact.



You would prefer we rely on stories, speculation and conjecture?

Math is a science. Math resolves. Math is good.



I was hoping we could put our differences aside. I figured we may be reading each other in the wrong context, just was trying to take the malice out of this debate.
Didn't think it was a yes no answer. Figured if we clarify ourselves a little better, we may get a long a little better. My point is not getting across, perhaps we should leave this here. Last thing WE need is something else to debate.



Never known Frogfish to cry.

I guess robbieb got you offside first up with



You then challenged his knowledge. He was good enough to share it, of course he might start to get a little iffy. Fair enough too. If he gets of his backside and studies the subject, who are we to challenge him. He chose that as his field and is good enough to share that. Regardless of what anyone might think of his blunt manner, he should be commended.



Still can't say
"I was wrong" hey. Don't worry, happens to the best of us, even me
I doubt much would keep you from sleeping at night. I still reckon you are a "bluer".

Yeah, sorry you not feeling good. We won't be here in this Forum if not for mathematics, my point is I have question on a mathematical calculation in predicting body parts strength and dimension of a living organism.

Correct
Thank you Spacey. Good to see more logical thinking entering this debate

You are dead right. Simple math resolves an awful lot.

Sorry to hear you are ill. Hope you are better tomorrow

- If you want to learn from him, no one is telling you no to?
- I simply stated my belief and logic. Can't I do that?
- Most of the things he had stated I have read before myself. NO, I'm not a Zoologist, just got interested at one time. I just don't believe and agree with 100% of what I read, sometimes I wonder and question the claim.
- What is this that you want me to admit defeat or I was wrong? Why is it eating you up? I mean, you think I'm wrong, isn't that enouh for you?

Alive or dead, an aminal can be properly measured.
It is "simple maths"- we know enough about biology to determine an animals size with mathematics, as psyche101 said, it's a science.

Thanks for getting my point, there, psyche101, despite my embarrassing error (I hate it when i stuff up!)
And I'm sure I'll be right in a few days- nothing like the onset of winter to get a girl all sunffled up

I know that. We are talking about Crytozoology here, something that does not exist.

It doesn't matter!
Many crytpids can be debunked simply by using science to prove that it cannot phycically exist. Others are more plausible, and science cannot prove or disprove, which leaves it open for debate...

You can apply science to any theory, be it giant snakes, fairies, Santa Claus, and it doesn't diminish the validity of the process, just the theory....

Sometimes you don't even need science to disprove some claims here.
Won't be here if I don't believe in Science, but it is not perfect. There are just things we cannot be sure of no matter how we calculate or theorize it.

I agree with you there Aroces

And that is the debate here, calculating and theorizing a 40 foot snake.
One side say, it is impossible because of the calculated and theoretical aspect of it, one side say it is highly unlikely alright but the possibility is there for nature can be unpredictable and full of surprises.

Nature would not produce a snake that cannot live...Cannot sustain itself.

Quite possible, but who are we to tell which and what nature can sustain?
We can make an educated guess and speculation, that is all we can do.
If we can control nature completely then we can assure such snake can't survive.

Well, you are saying not to. You are saying he is wrong, a zoology major is wrong. You too are "a memeber of a board" and also could be anyone.
Are you saying we should dump his factual information in favour of your view because you are "interested"?

I do not see where this applies to my post, however, if the arrogance you have shown becomes a regular sentiment toward intelligence on this board, people like you will drive away people like this. Why the hell should they come in here and share knowledge of they are going to be heavily debated on facts they study everyday and know to be true? Even called liars and their hard earned degrees quastioned by someone out for a bit of fun?
You will spoil it for all of us. We seem to have lost pilgrim_shadow, have not seen him lately and no doubt he has left for this very reason. Shame



Your logic is flawed. Getting proportionally bigger does not mean tensile strength remains a constant where length is introduced as a major factor. Good old simple math.

Don't pit your logic agqainst someone that has more experience in the field you are challenging.
I do not know what your area of expertise is, but no doubt, you will find it a place to share it on this board one day. When that day comes, we all will shut up and listen to you. I guess you will see how you like it when some smart-alec comes in and tells you what you have studied your whole life is wrong because they have a belief and a belief cannot be wrong.
Your belief has been proven incorrect by people with more experience than you, yet you insult them for showing you your error

State your belief and logic with manners. We are in a social environment.



So because you have read it before you should challenge someone in this field? Gee grateful of you how dare someone provide something you have read before!! No wonder you chastised them!!

robbieb is a zoologist.

Good for you. It is a massivly entertaining subject isn't it? I too enjoy it. Why such disagreement constantly then. Question politely, these people you question have more experience than the two of us put together and folder over where this field is concerned. State your questions, fine. Makes this place run. How about leaving this point now, as we have discussed it several times with the same result. Kind of like you teaching a zoology major about herpetology.



Seems to be bothering you somewhat now. Happy to leave that here as well if you are. Just another irrelevant circular by-argument.

Could you please clarify. I took your meaning to suggest that you believe a 100 foot snake can survive happily in the wild when you said "You just don't know how big it can get"
I then see at the start of your posts, you said a 50 foot snake is plausible.
In this post it is 40 foot.
Just what do you think? I know robbieb can be somewhat blunt, but you have to admit, he supplies a damn good swag of fact to support his stance. Even from an unfounded skeptical point of view, reviewing his posts, it is highly unlikely he has slipped up anywhere.
Not to mention the straightforward logic of Frogfish. I mean he is right.

- I'm not going to dispute with you if you believe that a Zoologist here in this forum is the key to your wealth of information. If you believe with everything he reads, I have no problem with that, but don't expect everyone to agree with him 100% because you think we should.
- Can't dump his factual informatio even if I want to. THIS IS A FORUM WHERE WE ARE FREE TO SATATE OUR MIND AND MAKE THE MEMBERS DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES.
- They stated what they know and I stated mine. I did not bark at anyone for not agreeing with me like the way you are now.
- We are in a social environment alright and not a dictatorial one wherein if a Zoologist that nobody knows say so, that we are suppose all to believe it.
- I said, we don't know how big they can really get. 30? 40 50? Who knows???
The bigger the more the probability lessens. Our Zoologist claims 40 feet 100% NOT POSSIBLE. I say, 99% not possible. Clear enough?

This is to funny........... why is it not possible for a snake to get bigger then science says it should?

Nature is always giving us oddities: some live and some die, there is no one that tell's Nature what to do, science is not always right. What about GOD? science say's we come from apes/monkey's , some say from the ocean, try and tell that to all the church going people in the world..

As the saying goes," LIFE WILL FIND A WAY....".

EXACTLY, i don't care if there is no snake thats over 40', but don't tell me that its not possible, anything and everything is possible.

hha no its not. its not possible for u to grow wings right now. see proved u wrong say anything and everything is possible is stupid

I don't expect anyione to believe anyone. I expect a reasonable person would consider fact and if a question is needed, PM, but best of all, a massive wealth of information is provided to every memeber by way of inernet.
Check it for youself. If you can find an error, bring it to the attention of the person presenting the fact.




They stated what they know. You stated what you think. If you think opinion holds water over hard facts, go on believing that. Expect others to tell you to keep that to yourself though.

Bark?? Haven't read many of my posts have you. I have been biting my tounge on many occassions during this conversation. I am doing my level best to keep this at a civilised level.
This whole conversation began because of the noise you made with your barking.



Social manners. If a person studies, but you don't personally know them, you don't believe them? How did your school teachers (assuming you are not still in school) cope with that?



He says 40 feet 100% impossible does he??

When the14u2cee said



in port 227, then robbieb replied with



in post 228

Clear as mud.

Woof.

I REALLY hate that saying too.

Woof woof. Grrr.

this is not anytihng similar to a 40 foot snake. a siamese twin isnt anything like an anaimal getting larger thne it should be dont forget these animals would have died in the wild too. and also genetuc mutations like the cat with one eye and no nose arent the same a a huge snake either. this was just irevelant to the conversation. i want my 5 minutes back

just because you don't believe doesn't mean it cant happen,growing wing's , well should i put some picture's up of flying people, or what is SUPPOSED to be pics of flying or lavitating humanoids?

Just because you have a little schooling? doesn't mean your point is always right. for anything you write on here i can find something to put doubts in another readers head, you can debunk things all you want, that doesn't mean it got debunked, and i'm STUPID, ok, let me stoop a little (LOL) i'm rubber your glue....

so u belive u can grow wings that was my point. u said anything and everything is possible and i said nope u wont grow wings but apparently u think u will. and all i can say is WOW what are u smoking

And for, i believe the 4th time, i still believe there is a snake out there be it an Anaconda or python, that will be 40' or longer it is not IMPOSSIBLE

No, i cant grow wing's, until i die, then i will hopefully have a pair.

- It seem a reasonable person to you is one who agrees with your Zoologist.
- Don't need to give sites and tell you what books each time I say something. If it does not make sense then everyone in this forum can read it and make comment. I got no problem with that.
- Don't try to be civilized then and hold yourself, just be yourself.
- I don't know them, do you?

eh i dont recal any people becoming angles in any jewish christian or islamic manuscripts in fact people are suppsoed to be above angels when they die and go to heaven. god made the angles bow down to adam.

Why is it that, in this situation there has to be a right or wrong? i have put up some respectable names on this topic that agree with me but you still don't want to respect that fact. And i don't believe there are any stupid people on UM, just some who don't know how to agree to disagree.....

You telling me now you from heaven or something?

This is a whole other topic that can go on forever..

I think our Zoologist replied in the wrong Forum.
Maybe he got confused and was intending to reply where he is a Spiritualist.

im here to speak the truth and thats what i give u ur the one who started off with this nonsence stuff aobut u being able to fly

More than one science agreees with this.
The strongest argument for seems to be more concerned with physics and tensile strength.

If you make something longer, it is more likely to snap, as would the bones of a massive snake with larger organs placing increased preassure on the said bones causing them to snap.
Bigger is not always better.

YES, theoretically true. But how do we know really what happens to their body if ever they grow that big?

i agree but its not impossible for a snake to get that long...

u knwo waht psyche. these people just odnt wantto listen and there nouthing we cna do about it. they dont want to look at physics or biochemistry or zoology. they like to sit and say were wrong but they have never given a single fact. all they did was contridict us and when i asked at least ten times for al ink to bakc up anything they said they ignored it completly.


and so basicly u think becausew im a zoologist or as u put it "claim to be one" that i cant have a fasination with religion too. ill be happy to talk religion with u too. have very radical theories on religion. i based them off a combination of science and religion to create a story line. i am jewish and i belive in god and i belive in religion i belive thatl ife started as sicnece said it did. if u want ot know more aobut my theory which there isnt a person i know that i have told it to that wasnt fasinated by it let me know ill be more thne happy to tell it to anyone. in fact there are people out there now that bleive in my theory not alot mind u just people that i told it to. but they bleive im right.

A reasonable person (in this case as this is what you are refering to) is one who will accept facts when provided, and admit it when shown to be incorrect.

My Zoologist??? Wonder what robbieb thinks about that.

Hear that robbieb, you are mine LOL



Don't need to back up your claims with factual evidence? Your point of view should be strongly considered over that of MY Zoologist. Hehe, I like having my own personal scientist.



After some of the arguments and points of view you have presented, both our memberships would have lasted about 0.5 seconds. I am usually quite blunt asa well.
I am being true to myself, I am letting you know that you are about to chase more talent out of this forum by way of sheer frustration, as others before you have, and that I ask you to stop. I enjoy the company of these fellows. Please don't wreck it for me.



I know Frogfish by reputation. I have watched robbieb since he started. I know of them more them I know of you.
Both have presented stirling fact after fact, look at Frogfishes work in the Palentology section!! They have never challenged anything by way of speculation, they provide links to support facts they offer and answer questions posed to them. All for free. Seems pretty good character wouldn't you say? Quite unselfish. Top blokes, both of them

Especially My Zoologist.


woof.

Sure, I'm listening. But don't get upset again if I find something questionable.

Are you kidding? thats all i do is put up links. your the one that think's your THEORY's are right.

1.http://www.trueauthority.com/cryptozoology/anaconda.htm
2.http://www.geocities.com/capedrevenger/giantanaconda.html

Shame hey. Good fact and study going to waste

I would be more than interested in your theories on religion. Evolution and my Christian beliefs have had me in turmoil for some time.

haha ill be urs

- Me chase members away? You think I have the capability? Gee, I don't know if I would take that as an insult or compliment.
- YUP, your Zoologist, for you the only one he is a Zoologist to. Oh, Frogfish too. I was wrong.
- If you enjoy them really, then go to emailing. This is a public forum.
- Frogfish? Palentology? He said he studied Genetic engineering. Is that the same?
- I'm sure they are good individual, they just don't like anyone challenging what they post ere.

Its not going to waste,i read everything and take it in, rather i agree or disagree, we all learn thing's everyday, i'm not saying that your wrong, either of you, i just disagree that your science is alway's right.

There are people, scientist's, professor's and scholars who agree with my theory's, "Father of Cryptozoologist's", Bernard Heuvelmans has stated the same exact thing's about this subject that i have.

How long is you opinion?

Some in the thread have claimed 100 feet!! Some 50 and some 40. I think that is half the arguing in this thread, so many views have been put forward that it can get confusing working out what exactly is being disputed.

Agreed. However, I am sure you will agree that most of the people on these boards that challenge scientific theory and fact are not qualified to do so, and then get their knickers in a twist when you tell them so.



I would be interested in hearing your theories. Is there a thread on them? If so, could you point me at them please. Always ready to listen


BTW nice links. Reading them now.

Actually Yes, he could spring wings. It could just happen. Also there is an infinite amount of possible scenarios why this could happen.

‘Anything is possible’ is a true yet abused statement, which really needs its side cousin ‘but is it probable?’

Good old Probability.

The chances of him just sprouting wings are extremely low, yet still possible.

I understand why people find the statement ‘anything is possible’ annoying but it’s kinda used as a antidote to ‘Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence’ made by the late great Carl Sagan. Although a true statement, I feel it has been abused to the point of creating a dogmatic scientific approach which can actually lead to a kind of static ignorance.