The Elusive Liger

Farmerman set it up, but thank you.

NowYou scared Gordie off. You evil tongued English person. I clear my nose in your direction.

Elderberries?

no, not so much. Thank you for asking.

Nauh, didn't scare me off. I just only reply when the remarks merit a response. If there is not content to reply to ~ I am not going to just rant and ramble like a troll.
*I reply specifically to, and only to the content of the discussion and those comments which are either: Wrong; ill informed; inaccurate; misguided; on topic; are informative; or are in any way misleading to the audience.

Live to kill Rapists,
Hate for imbecils,
Respect, Honor, Dignity,
Christ(Wisdom[the Word of God{the first of his acts of long ago, and last breath}]) is our Salvation.

That lasted all of five seconds.



By the way, anyone who doesn't recognise Latin straightaway has not had much of an education.

Izzy. I dont think you are showing the proper respect for a true genus in our mist.

we strive for opposable thumbs, we do.

An undiscovered genus, may I suggest calling it whatthefuckisthat.

you may, but the wahtthefuckisthat will inevitable respond with a, "Doushweasel, I don't want this fuzzy s*** you pulled out of your a** on my topic board."

Genuses can't respond. Although Castor has been known to growl a bit.

Were you home schooled?

However, jackalopes are real, as ever'body over here knows . . .

A restaurant I used to eat in, back in the early 60s, had a stuffed jackalope behind the counter.

they also have a jackalope mounted on the wall at the gas station on the other side of the border crossing from my home town.

Pronghorn antelope are not actually antelope. They are descended from a common ancestor with goats. They are the fastest land mammal in North America, and are the fastest in the world, except for the cheetah. They evolved in North America at a time when a cheetah-like predator roamed the Great Plains. By dodging, they could almost always outrun the cheetahs. They can hit and sustain 55 miles per hour for a half mile, and maintain 42 miles per hour for about two miles and can maintain 35 miles per hour for about four miles (according to Wikipedia).

Correction : we have samples of PARTS of the whole DNA from Smilodon (note lack of plural for a genus word) but to conclude there is a difference because of that limited amount of DNA...we still do not have comparable sequencing...is an error .

I never really implied to the completeness of the available DNA data from Smilodon. I knew they hadda use a PCR tehnique to amplify the DNA data they had so I just assumed that they had a complete enough batch to do a Phylo... tree analyses. I WAS WR WR WR WRONG
In fact, to make your point even more disturbing , the overall sequencing that has been accomplished for Smilodon (as a genus), actually comes from BLAST analyses Basic Local Alignment Search Data of the mDNA of several Smilodon species that had never ever "met for lunch". This means that they smooshed all the Smilodon DNA data they had and drew their tree from this "Commitee of data"
After considering your point about "bits of DNA", I went to a series of sequencing papers by a dude named Dzhabarov who displayed phylogenetic trees of a "generalized Smilodon" based upon using the BLAST program on S fatalis (the US speies from Kansas sites and , of course, the TAR PITS), S gracilis (another US speciemn that went extinct 10's of thousands of years before S fatalis) {THAT KIND OF PISSES ME OFF because its "SMUDGING" the data that lets us understand the subsequent radiating of other big cats from SMilodon (IF THAT WAS EVEN THE CASE)

And, , to make matters even more complex, Dzhabarov "added in", some yDNA and mDNA from a S populator (which lived exclusivley in S America along the Andes. So it development was fairly recent but still, it had its own thousands of generations of its own evolutionary path.

These data imply that we can do a phylogenetic tree about "Where Smilodons diverged from", but we really have to be careful about "what did Smilodon turned into (if anything)"

It took Planck Institute a decade or more to fully sequence neanderthals DNA and do it well before they could safely announce a conclusion that Neanderthals DID interbreed with humans. (I remember hen Paabo released his first bit of DNA data and denied any Neanderthal genetics in our own genoms and he was speaking too soon.


I must acknowledge that you are correct and that the overall sequencing of Smilodon is a patchwork. I suppose the full and correct (descendent implied) genome of S populator and S fatalis andS gracilis, will need the help of PCR (xeroxing) and lots more DNA samples.

Thank you for bringing out that detail . I shall try to be more discerning and critical over DNA data from papers placed on the web ( I assumed they were juried) when its being used to do develop implied "detailed" phylogenetic trees .

I never really implied to the completeness of the available DNA data from Smilodon. I knew they hadda use a PCR tehnique to amplify the DNA data they had so I just assumed that they had a complete enough batch to do a Phylo... tree analyses. I WAS WR WR WR WRONG
In fact, to make your point even more disturbing , the overall sequencing that has been accomplished for Smilodon (as a genus), actually comes from BLAST analyses Basic Local Alignment Search Data of the mDNA of several Smilodon species that had never ever "met for lunch". This means that they smooshed all the Smilodon DNA data they had and drew their tree from this "Commitee of data"
After considering your point about "bits of DNA", I went to a series of sequencing papers by a dude named Dzhabarov who displayed phylogenetic trees of a "generalized Smilodon" based upon using the BLAST program on S fatalis (the US speies from Kansas sites and , of course, the TAR PITS), S gracilis (another US speciemn that went extinct 10's of thousands of years before S fatalis) {THAT KIND OF PISSES ME OFF because its "SMUDGING" the data that lets us understand the subsequent radiating of other big cats from SMilodon (IF THAT WAS EVEN THE CASE)

And, , to make matters even more complex, Dzhabarov "added in", some yDNA and mDNA from a S populator (which lived exclusivley in S America along the Andes. So it development was fairly recent but still, it had its own thousands of generations of its own evolutionary path.

These data imply that we can do a phylogenetic tree about "Where Smilodons diverged from", but we really have to be careful about "what did Smilodon turn into (if anything)"

It took Planck Institute a decade or more to fully sequence neanderthals DNA and do it well before they could safely announce a conclusion that Neanderthals DID interbreed with humans. (I remember hen Paabo released his first bit of DNA data and denied any Neanderthal genetics in our own genoms and he was speaking too soon.


I must acknowledge that you are correct and that the overall sequencing of Smilodon is somewhat of a patchwork.(DNA degrades and the tar pit data is especially non-upportive even though it contains samples from the most recent drowned specimens) I suppose the full and correct (descendent implied) genome of S populator and S fatalis andS gracilis, will need the help of PCR (xeroxing) and lots more DNA samples.

Thank you for bringing out that detail . I shall try to be more discerning and critical over DNA data from papers placed on the web ( I assumed they were juried) when its being used to do develop implied "detailed" phylogenetic trees .

most cats have an evolutionary flat tire (presumably from some pst bottleneck when all felids were AMBUSH hunters).
They , as a group have shitty mitochondria (the cheetah is especially an example of being able to run fast but for only about 10 seconds). Whereas most ruminants hve mitochondria that allow them to "gallumph along" at firly consistent higher speeds with darting about, and do this all damn day.
The Red Queen example of evolution between prey and predator is an example where the systematics pf adaptive evolution are easily observed.

saying what they evolved from is not a scientific statement. ** Saying they evolved at all is not a scientific statement. That is not observed, used in practice or studied.

I don't think you're in a position to say what is and what is not scientific.