Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
UM-Bot

Nazi giant rabbit breeding program revealed

64 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

TheVeryFirstDinosaur

Nothing wrong with raising rabbits, giant or not. But, if you are planning to commit the genocide of a people, you will have a problem.

Those 2 don't go hand-in-hand?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lava_Lady

Those 2 don't go hand-in-hand?

No, but raising giant rabbits, depending on exactly how large you are thinking, could indicate a desire to take over the world via innocuous, or seemingly innocuous, cute bunnies. Look it up. It's a fact. ;)

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy

I'm interested to hear Simbi Laveau's take on this (as well as surprised she hasn't commented yet).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skookum

While i don't agree with Nazism compaired to some i.e Stalin Moe Pol Pot the Catholic Church they were a bunch of boy scouts but that aside the Germans were a very clever lot and did come up with a lot of clever inovations and inventions V1 and V2 rockets being just two make no mistake we were lucky to win

No doubt they were years ahead in certain technologies. However they heavily underestimated the Allies ability to counter their moves, almost like they thought we were blithering idiots. The Battle of Britain was the first example of it. They knew how many squadrons Britain had, but had never found out how many aircraft were in a squadron. They assumed it would be 8 aircraft like theirs were arranged when it was actually 18. This led them to think that Britain only had half the amount of combat aircraft they actually did, a fatal error when you are attacking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Technocrat

While i don't agree with Nazism compaired to some i.e Stalin Moe Pol Pot the Catholic Church they were a bunch of boy scouts but that aside the Germans were a very clever lot and did come up whith a lot of clever inovations and inventions V1 and V2 rockets being just two make no mistake we were lucky to win

You say, 'we were lucky to win'. If by 'we' you mean the British, you never would have won in a 1 to 1 fight with Germany. It was the Americans that won the war for you. Also, please explain your remark about the Catholic Church.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Simbi Laveau

Angora bunnies are still sheared for their fur. Some idiot sells it on etsy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Simbi Laveau

Huh? I always thought the "giant rabbits" were a joke. Photoshoped images. But I guess they are real.

220px-Runt_and_Paxie.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flemish_Giant

Snopes: Picture is real....

http://www.snopes.com/photos/animals/giantrabbit.asp

Fleming giants are huge compared to a regular bunny, but I've never seen one in the USA, as big as the ones from Europe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Simbi Laveau

I'm interested to hear Simbi Laveau's take on this (as well as surprised she hasn't commented yet).

Sorry, just saw this now.

I've never heard of the Nazi angora rabbit connection. Sounds ridiculous really , but the Japanese experimented on rabbits during ww2.

It was for bio warfare though.

They were on an island off the coast of the mainland.

When the war ended, they set all the bunnies free.

They've been there ever since.

Living all over the island free.

It's called bunny island. Usagishima .

I want to live there... Or Nekoosa island... There's an island off the coast there with all free roaming cats too.

People do breed Flemish giants here, and angora as well.

Theyre very sweet animals both. Angora need daily grooming or they end up matted in ways that are so disgusting.

There's one breeder we bunny people despise because she has killed so many bunnies with her neglect.

Giants included. She now shears angora bunnies and sells their fur on etsy.

She's a real piece of......... work.

Edited by Simbi Laveau
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taun

Back in the 1970's I was stationed in Germany, serving in a nuclear missile battalion... One night I had to pull guard duty out at the remote site where the warheads were stored... This area

was a well known and very well posted "Lethal Force" area...

Since I was an NCO I was SGT of the Guard... We had been having a lot of trouble with the so called "Red Brigades" (Communist activists throughout a large chunk of Western Europe)

in particular the "Bader-Meinhoff" group who today we would call terrorists...

About 2:30 am that night I had a rather nervous young soldier out walking a post, and a fog rolled in - that made him particularly spooked, so I kept a closer watch on him than usual...

Suddenly I heard him yell "Halt or I'll shoot" followed immediately by him firing 3 or 4 rounds very quickly... I ran over to his postion and he was aiming at a buch of tall grass... "Sarge! There's

someone out in the weeds!"...

So I went and checked (somewhat nervously, I must add) only to see that he had been spooked by the largest danged hare I had ever seen... It wasn't as big as the rabbits in the pics

posted earlier - but it was easily half their size...

We called the guard "Elmer Fudd" the rest of his time in unit...

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skookum

You say, 'we were lucky to win'. If by 'we' you mean the British, you never would have won in a 1 to 1 fight with Germany. It was the Americans that won the war for you. Also, please explain your remark about the Catholic Church.

Never was a straight fight between the Germans and the British. Germany had allied, with other European nations including Italy.

It was the Russians which really brought down the Nazi war machine imo. If they hadn't have had that second front I think the war would have dragged on well into 1946, possibly with the British and Americans being pushed out of mainland Europe. The first nuke would most likely have fallen on Berlin, not Hiroshima. The bomb was originally being developed for the European campaign.

Doesn't bear thinking about really.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kaa-Tzik

While i don't agree with Nazism compaired to some i.e Stalin Moe Pol Pot the Catholic Church they were a bunch of boy scouts but that aside the Germans were a very clever lot and did come up whith a lot of clever inovations and inventions V1 and V2 rockets being just two make no mistake we were lucky to win

I would not say they came up with a lot of clever ideas, more that they were clever in taking an idea from another country and getting it into production first, or made it better. The nazis "genius" was in production and organisation, not original thought. The V1 and V2 rockets were based on the ideas of Tsiolkovsky and Korolyov, who built a rocket even before the war began that was clearly the protoype for the V1. Von Braun was more of a plagiariser and organiser than "rocket scientist". Another idea not theirs was the jet engine, it was developed by Frank Whittle, but the nazis got a jet plane into production first. Same as infra-red night vision devices, the original invention was not theirs, but the nazis get the credit because they managed to fit a few Panther tanks with working IR devices before anybody else. I will give them credit for inovative submarine technology though, as except the nuclear power aspect, all modern submarines, Russian and American, are the great grandchildren of the nazi type XXI

Edited by Kaa-Tzik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skookum

I would not say they came up with a lot of clever ideas, more that they were clever in taking an idea from another country and getting it into production first, or made it better. The nazis "genius" was in production and organisation, not original thought. The V1 and V2 rockets were based on the ideas of Tsiolkovsky and Korolyov, who built a rocket even before the war began that was clearly the protoype for the V1. Von Braun was more of a plagiariser and organiser than "rocket scientist". Another idea not theirs was the jet engine, it was developed by Frank Whittle, but the nazis got a jet plane into production first. Same as infra-red night vision devices, the original invention was not theirs, but the nazis get the credit because they managed to fit a few Panther tanks with working IR devices before anybody else. I will give them credit for inovative submarine technology though, as except the nuclear power aspect, all modern submarines, Russian and American, are the great grandchildren of the nazi type XXI

I agree somewhat with this however they spread their research and technologies to thin. They had scientists working on too many projects with a lack of cohesion when desperately needed.

They were also obsessed with perfection of manufacturing rather than build things in the quantities required to make a difference. They ridiculed the first captured T34's, Sherman's and Churchhill tanks believing these where old tanks that were sacrificed. Truth was they were crudely welded and basic but could be made in numbers that Panzers, Tigers and Panther factories could only dream off.

I read somewhere that the mighty Tiger tank was so complex, and not always that reliable the most operational at one time was less than 150 spread throughout the campaigns. Jet aircraft they built were truly brilliant but they couldn't build the numbers. Surely a quantity of FW190's would have devastated the allies airforces but crucial manufacturing facilities were taken up building these complex jet machines. I doubt the jets shot down half as many aircraft as good squadrons of piston engine planes could.

My Great Grandfather flew in the RAF flying Hurricanes and Spitfires, he use to get very angry at claims that the ME109 was so much better. He said both the Hurricane and Spitfire could out turn the 109, out turning your opponent was the most crucial thing in air combat at the time. Also although the ME 109 had fuel injection the engine power was far below the Rolls Royce Merlin engine, hence why they built the 109 so small. What he did agree with was the ME109 had massively greater fire power, however was complicated to maintain and repair unlike the British fighters.

With the XXI Uboat, the major innovation was it used electric motors and only diesel motors to charge the batteries. The Porpoise and Gato American subs used this configuration although nowhere near as effective.

Edited by skookum
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taun

I agree with Skook...

The German's did indeed have some brilliant equipment and adaptations of other tech... but that was partially their downfall as well.... They had so many different systems - all highly complex and with few

interchangeable parts - that their logistics chain was a nightmare... If they had focused on a few more basic designs, and built them in greater numbers and with a more stable - widespread logistics network, they

would have had a much better chance of winning the war...

They should have focused on the Pzkw IV (tank), the Type XXI Uboat, the 88mm artillery piece/AA gun, and the ME 109/FW110...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skookum

I agree with Skook...

The German's did indeed have some brilliant equipment and adaptations of other tech... but that was partially their downfall as well.... They had so many different systems - all highly complex and with few

interchangeable parts - that their logistics chain was a nightmare... If they had focused on a few more basic designs, and built them in greater numbers and with a more stable - widespread logistics network, they

would have had a much better chance of winning the war...

They should have focused on the Pzkw IV (tank), the Type XXI Uboat, the 88mm artillery piece/AA gun, and the ME 109/FW110...

How much was arrogance as well? The Russians T34 (widely regarded as the best overall tank) had a major innovation of slopped Armour. Yet they persisted making tanks have square armour and just increased the thickness although the problem made them well overweight for the available engine power. They eventually embraced it with the Panther all too late.

Even today they are obsessed with square shapes, look at BMW etc.

I think we should also praise the operators of the Sherman's etc, who although had vastly inferior equipment used their human ingenuity to defeat vastly superior firepower by exploiting weaknesses.

Again if it had dragged on M26 Pershing's and Super Pershing's would have more than equalled the Tiger and King Tiger tanks on the battlefield. The Pershing was so advanced that its basic design lasted well into Korea (known then as the snow leopard) and beyond. The first shoot out with a King Tiger and Super Pershing saw the M26 victorious.

Edited by skookum
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taun

How much was arrogance as well? The Russians T34 (widely regarded as the best overall tank) had a major innovation of slopped Armour. Yet they persisted making tanks have square armour and just increased the thickness although the problem made them well overweight for the available engine power. They eventually embraced it with the Panther all too late.

Even today they are obsessed with square shapes, look at BMW etc.

I think we should also praise the operators of the Sherman's etc, who although had vastly inferior equipment used their human ingenuity to defeat vastly superior firepower by exploiting weaknesses.

Again if it had dragged on M26 Pershing's and Super Pershing's would have more than equalled the Tiger and King Tiger tanks on the battlefield. The Pershing was so advanced that its basic design lasted well into Korea (known then as the snow leopard) and beyond. The first shoot out with a King Tiger and Super Pershing saw the M26 victorious.

Good point about the T34c... I'm not ceratin the German's had the ability to make sloped armor - not sure how the Russians managed it actually... If you look at the Sherman It also was "slab sided"... Three advantages the Sherman did have over the

much more powerful Tiger/etc was: 1) Numbers - they could mass fire on single tanks making a disabling shot much more likely, 2) Mobility - they were very fast tanks for the day - same with the T34c... It was easier to manuever around the slower, 'lumbering'

giants and 'kick 'em in the pants' (as Gen Patton said) and 3) height - This one is usually overlooked... The Sherman was a tall tank... You would think that this made it a better target, but with a competent crew, this actually made it harder to hit... It could get

into a "hull down" position, just over the crest of a hill, etc and only expose the turret and gun actually making it a smaller target... The Pershing, Patton, and later the M60 both used this feature to good advantage...

Edited by Taun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skookum

Not sure it was about ability it was more science. If you slope a sheet of metal at a 45 degree angle a flat impact makes the armour seem almost doubled in thickness then you get deflection.

The Americans with their tall tanks had the idea they could fire above ditches and hedges. They had slopped armour but petrol engines which ignited easily and got the reputation as 'Tommy cookers'. The problem was solved quicker than reported with aircraft style self sealing fuel tanks.

The Sherman had many incarnations such as the British 'Firefly' which could destroy anything the German's could field with it's 17 pounder gun. All mounted on the Sherman chassis like the M10 and numerous other variants that were simply maintained in the field.

If I had to be inside a tank it would have been a Tiger or Panther tank to tank, but P47's, Typhoon's, Tempests and P51's made mincemeat of them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taun

Not sure it was about ability it was more science. If you slope a sheet of metal at a 45 degree angle a flat impact makes the armour seem almost doubled in thickness then you get deflection.

The Americans with their tall tanks had the idea they could fire above ditches and hedges. They had slopped armour but petrol engines which ignited easily and got the reputation as 'Tommy cookers'. The problem was solved quicker than reported with aircraft style self sealing fuel tanks.

The Sherman had many incarnations such as the British 'Firefly' which could destroy anything the German's could field with it's 17 pounder gun. All mounted on the Sherman chassis like the M10 and numerous other variants that were simply maintained in the field.

If I had to be inside a tank it would have been a Tiger or Panther tank to tank, but P47's, Typhoon's, Tempests and P51's made mincemeat of them.

I understood about the science vrs ability thing.. I'm just surprised the German's were beaten to the punch on the application of it... Up until the very late 1930's industrial capability wasn't advanced enough to make a solid,

single casting of a tank turret - which is why slightly earlier tanks resembled the old Grant and Lee's... welded turrets, not a much stronger, more 'physics friendly' sloping single cast turret... Just surprised the Soviets beat the

rest of the world to that with all the other problems they had...

edit: Kind wierd how we went from large rabbits to WWII armored combat.... (My bad)...

Edited by Taun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skookum

The Lee's and Grant's were riveted to begin with, then quickly changed to welded when they realized what rivets did under impact.

You are a smart guy as you answered your question earlier about the Allies dominance over the Nazi's. The supply lines where the key. A pipeline was laid from Britain to France to supply fuel, that meant that aircraft and tanks etc had to use the same fuel. Not ideal from a tank crew's point of view but better than no fuel as the Germans constantly endured.

The UK and US would have completed the 'bomb' first. Thank goodness the war ended when it did. It is only speculation that Hitler would have got it first.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kaa-Tzik

I agree with Skook...

The German's did indeed have some brilliant equipment and adaptations of other tech... but that was partially their downfall as well.... They had so many different systems - all highly complex and with few

interchangeable parts - that their logistics chain was a nightmare... If they had focused on a few more basic designs, and built them in greater numbers and with a more stable - widespread logistics network, they

would have had a much better chance of winning the war...

They should have focused on the Pzkw IV (tank), the Type XXI Uboat, the 88mm artillery piece/AA gun, and the ME 109/FW110...

Took the words right out of my mouth with that list, though perhaps Panther instead of panzer IV. If they had cancelled all P4, Tiger and the vanity machines, like Ferdinand, they could have produced a good amount by Bagration and D Day. Still would have lost though, as IS2, and if the war had contiuned longer, IS3 and Centurion would have trashed them.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kaa-Tzik

Good point about the T34c... I'm not ceratin the German's had the ability to make sloped armor - not sure how the Russians managed it actually

Superior engineering, honestly. The Germans have a reputation that sometimes falls flat on it's face. Unfortunately not a single pre-war produced T-34 exists, but from the plans and existing high quality photographs it can be seen that they were given a finish equal to, or better than any Western tank. There was also the factor of a genius designer, Mikhail Koshkin.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thewild

....

There's one breeder we bunny people despise because she has killed so many bunnies with her neglect.

Giants included. She now shears angora bunnies and sells their fur on etsy.

She's a real piece of......... work.

I am not sure who you are speaking of, my rabbits were well-cared for and had long lives, I had a doe that was 13 and I cried when she passed. Mine had a formulated, balanced and scheduled rotation diet, I brushed them constantly and sheared on a regular schedule. They had fleece jackets to wear after shearing, I had a climate controlled barn and sold quite a bit of wool on Etsy. But while I was an active member of the club I saw many people that were purely in it for profit and not the joy of the hand-spinning hobby. It is terrible when a beautiful animal is taken and used and not recompensed by their owners. When I moved to Florida I only had three bunnies left and one of my good friends (of a like mind about their animals) up north took them in with their herd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lava_Lady

I am not sure who you are speaking of, my rabbits were well-cared for and had long lives, I had a doe that was 13 and I cried when she passed. Mine had a formulated, balanced and scheduled rotation diet, I brushed them constantly and sheared on a regular schedule. They had fleece jackets to wear after shearing, I had a climate controlled barn and sold quite a bit of wool on Etsy. But while I was an active member of the club I saw many people that were purely in it for profit and not the joy of the hand-spinning hobby. It is terrible when a beautiful animal is taken and used and not recompensed by their owners. When I moved to Florida I only had three bunnies left and one of my good friends (of a like mind about their animals) up north took them in with their herd.

How cute!!! Please, please, please post a pic of your bunny with their fleece jackets on!!! Xo) That is a must see!

I had a cat that I had to shear due to a skin problem years ago and when I put a sweater on him he just flopped over and refused to get up for the rest of the day. lol I know... nothing to do with the OP but had to share.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sundew

And you thought the bunnies were scary......

Kitler_1959295c.jpg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Simbi Laveau

I am not sure who you are speaking of, my rabbits were well-cared for and had long lives, I had a doe that was 13 and I cried when she passed. Mine had a formulated, balanced and scheduled rotation diet, I brushed them constantly and sheared on a regular schedule. They had fleece jackets to wear after shearing, I had a climate controlled barn and sold quite a bit of wool on Etsy. But while I was an active member of the club I saw many people that were purely in it for profit and not the joy of the hand-spinning hobby. It is terrible when a beautiful animal is taken and used and not recompensed by their owners. When I moved to Florida I only had three bunnies left and one of my good friends (of a like mind about their animals) up north took them in with their herd.

She's in NJ. Has killed literally 100s of animals.

She's despised within the rescue community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Simbi Laveau

How cute!!! Please, please, please post a pic of your bunny with their fleece jackets on!!! Xo) That is a must see!

I had a cat that I had to shear due to a skin problem years ago and when I put a sweater on him he just flopped over and refused to get up for the rest of the day. lol I know... nothing to do with the OP but had to share.

I own hairless cats. We have a wardrobe here.

I assume if bunnies are sheared and kept warm afterwards, that's that one thing.

The person I'm referring to is not so conscientious.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.