Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shrap
Seamus,
Seriously man, you sound like someone who just has it out for Bobby. Bobby has compiled a vast amount of research on these animals and has every right to believe what he is saying.
I have seen the evidence and feel Bobby is correct. I think any unbiased person does too. Even Bert acknowledges that these are most likely different from the normal Argentine Black and Whites. These animals are MUCH larger. Their eggs are MUCH larger. Their offspring at hatching are MUCH larger. At yearling stage they are MUCH larger. As adults they are Much larger. Etc. Etc.
While I agree nothing is 100% conclusive yet, the evidence compiled to this point is overwhelming to anyone who is unbiased.
|
He hasn't really presented a vast amount of anything. If it exists, I'd really like to see it.
"Most likely" is a phrase that defines probability while leaving some room for alternatives.
Larger adults would produce larger eggs that produce larger hatchlings. There's a gap, and I believe it's a signifigant one, in the known growth rates of this... I'm going to call it a "line" at the moment, for lack of a more precise term. The gap encompasses the time during which the animals will attain their near maximum size- but he has repeatedly described the offspring in a manner that indicates that size is an absolute, when it is an unknown. That, along with many of the attitudes and incomplete arguments he has presented in defense of his position, have left me skeptical of much of his sales pitch. I don't have it in for Bobby personally at all, not even remotely- I just want precision and accuracy when it comes to describing animals, especially those which are apparantly divergent from that which would be considered phenotypically normal.