Big Cat Sighting

[foxdropper 17,092]

57 minutes ago, lanesra said:

Anyone who sees a wallaby in the images from Devon actually need their eyes tested or are on a wind up , I’ve seen countless wallabies in the wild and that looks absolutely nothing like one when looking at the whole video , saying the tail is similiar to a wallabies is actually promoting it being a big cat.

It’s a cat no denying mate but until the scale via a daylight pic is forthcoming it means feck all .

[foxdropper 17,092]

6 hours ago, Greyman said:

I find it quite sad and amusing that many of the people here that just want to stifle debate and ruin threads are the same ones moaning about all the good guys leaving, if you could be bothered to read back over this thread many members have came forward with there own sightings and encounters answered questions that the goons keep asking every few pages, we have had lads seen cats flushed by hounds etc etc I have had many things given to me by these people and talk with many of them still through email or pm yet the doubters just ignore or shout them down until they just stop replying look at the highest posters on this thread 3 of the top 4 are just people that like to argue or cause controversy, I also find it strange how what I do is so offensive to these idiots, I did see a big cat at close quarters in the uk and got off my arse to find out more we’re as we have many people on here are just happy to make up lies pretending there out all the time and portraying themselves as something they are not shout over people and generally try to make themselves seem better than they really are, we are getting to a stage we’re the only people here will be the same wankers berating everyone and everything whilst patting themselves on the back for doing a great job, then shouting at the mods for ruining everything, as mike Tyson once said the internet has allowed idiots to get away with saying what they want without the risk of a smack in the mouth and this thread really highlights that, masters of your own demise 

Dont think your cut out for forums mate .Maybe if you yourself spent a bit more time in the countryside than arguing and threatening people on here then the mystery would be solved wide open with pics ,vids and a cub under your arm .

You seem incapable of having a discussion that isn’t to your advantage ,wont listen to anyone bar your evidence gathering crew and seem to think everybody else is an idiot .

You’ve been given a platform of 5 fecking years not weeks, years yet as has been mentioned time and time again you fail to impress even the most ardent cat believer besides  yourself .I don’t think we’ve ever seen anyone rise to your defence of a piece of evidence you’ve put up nor do we yet have a pic from the multitude of cameras both yourself and the thl collective have out .

Said it before but until you can take criticism  and take on board the words of those only wishing toget things straight then this thread is going to go on like a merry go round with no end .

The lads that find it hard to imagine large cats all seem very balanced to me in contrast to the weed smoking fraternity that see them .

[foxdropper 17,092]

19 hours ago, shaaark said:

MILLIONS of people around the world believe in God.

NO-ONE HAS EVER SEEN GOD, or Jesus and his 'miracles'.

Over to you, who, like me, doesn't believe in god, jesus, or any religion, quite rightly.

Yet you believe in large cats roaming this tiny island .May as well believe in all the above mate

[chartpolski 20,416]

52 minutes ago, foxdropper said:

So you’ve taken sides then Charts

You could see it like that, but I see it as leaning dangerously over one side of the fence !

Cheers.

[foxdropper 17,092]

We are all entitled to an opinion mate .

Could be said that a certain members attitude is why it hasn’t progressed .

[sandymere 8,261]

2 hours ago, lanesra said:

Anyone who sees a wallaby in the images from Devon actually need their eyes tested or are on a wind up , I’ve seen countless wallabies in the wild and that looks absolutely nothing like one when looking at the whole video , saying the tail is similiar to a wallabies is actually promoting it being a big cat.

Nobody sees a wallaby, it was just a reference to prior plausibility, ie we have good evidence of Wallabies in the UK but not big cats. 

 

prior plausibility - The Skeptic's Dictionary

SKEPDIC.COM

 

 

Edited December 4, 2022 by sandymere

[lanesra 3,961]

1 hour ago, foxdropper said:

It’s a cat no denying mate but until the scale via a daylight pic is forthcoming it means feck all .

Did you reply to the wallaby reply

[Francie 6,362]

12 minutes ago, sandymere said:

Nobody sees a wallaby, it was just a reference to prior plausibility, ie we have good evidence of Wallabies in the UK but not big cats.

Ahhh but you've no evidence of nothing exploding 13.8 billion years ago do you sandy? Plenty of assumptions,but that's it.

I'm not looking a debate either just pointing out your a tad hypocritical,they might not be a big breeding population but there could be lone stragglers,an you can't prove it wrong either.

Edited December 4, 2022 by Francie

[foxdropper 17,092]

5 minutes ago, lanesra said:

Did you reply to the wallaby reply

Sorry mate missed it .Can you repost please .

[foxdropper 17,092]

6 minutes ago, Francie said:

Ahhh but you've no evidence of nothing exploding 13.8 billion years ago do you sandy? Plenty of assumptions,but that's it.

I'm not looking a debate either just pointing out your a tad hypocritical,they might not be a big breeding population but there could be lone stragglers,an you can't prove it wrong either.

Nobody needs to Francie .It seem that’s a given after 5 years

[sandymere 8,261]

1 minute ago, Francie said:

Ahhh but you've no evidence of nothing exploding 13.8 billion years ago do you sandy? 

I'm not looking a debate either just pointing out your a tad hypocritical,they might not be a big breeding population but there could be lone stragglers,an you can't prove it wrong either.

Please stay on track, the  topic is long enough without wandering of into religion, big cats are a measurable living creature that are easily proven with good evidence. I'm happy to debate the likelihood of a small number of individuals rather than a large breeding population, don't need religion....

[sandymere 8,261]

The Science. ( Ignore if science is not your thing.)

Population, reproduction and survival, randomness/stochasticity?

What are the factors?

Genetic, the smaller the population the greater the vulnerability to random chance causing genetic drift. This results in allele being lost from a population resulting in a reduction in genetic diversity. This leads to inbreeding depression, the proliferation of negative recessive genes reducing adaptive potential. The rule of thumb is a 50/500 rule, ie a population of 50 is needed to prevent inbreeding depression and a population of 500 is needed to avoid genetic drift.

Environmental.

These are things like changing farming practice, climate etc, these effect all populations to a degree big or small but with very small population they can have a major impact ie building on a safe breeding area etc.

Natural events.

Less likely to impact in the UK, major droughts or massive forest fire etc.

Demographic.

This has an increased impact on smaller populations as they unlike large populations have lower numbers to even out the impact of random events. Things like breeding potential, sex ratio etc. These impacts are a known driver of extinction in populations under 50 individuals.

The layman’s terms. ( for those that ignored the above)

 

A few random big cats being released 40 or 50 years ago are very unlikely to have potential to provide an ongoing population surviving today.

Edited December 4, 2022 by sandymere

[pesky1972 4,929]

52 minutes ago, Francie said:

I'm not looking a debate either just pointing out your a tad hypocritical,they might not be a big breeding population but there could be lone stragglers,an you can't prove it wrong either.

Bit like a lot of the popular conspiracy theories this debate. Is it possible that they exist - yes. Is it probable - definitely not. But those that try and convince us of the highly improbable, present nothing in the way of credible evidence, but then also have the audacity to expect the sceptics to present evidence to prove they’re right. No wonder people think they’re mental. 

[Francie 6,362]

48 minutes ago, sandymere said:

Please stay on track, the  topic is long enough without wandering of into religion, big cats are a measurable living creature that are easily proven with good evidence. I'm happy to debate the likelihood of a small number of individuals rather than a large breeding population, don't need religion....

Glad your finally admitting your belief sandy,now we're getting somewere

Carryon......

[Francie 6,362]

1 minute ago, pesky1972 said:

Bit like a lot of the popular conspiracy theories this debate. Is it possible that they exist - yes. Is it probable - definitely not. But those that try and convince us of the highly improbable, present nothing in the way of credible evidence, but then also have the audacity to expect the sceptics to present evidence to prove they’re right. No wonder people think they’re mental. 

The onus is on greyman to prove it yes,but he don't have to if he don't want to,hopefully he can refrain from biting with a few folk an he can get some evidence out.