|
Post by Super Communist on Jul 25, 2012 6:10:21 GMT -5
Again read the account I posted.
Again this not a superhuman martial artist vs wolf thread; its a regular, fit, human vs wolf thread.
Yes and they usually suffer major concussion afterwords.
Again, the average man does not spend years reinforcing his arms by smashing them against hard objects, so your point is invalid.
You overestimate human common sense. I know people that think they are able to outrun lions, and I know others that think alligators can run faster than Olympic sprinters.(*cough*cough*Bear Grylls*) The average person would either underestimate the wolf and get torn to shreds, or outright shit themselves and get torn to shreds.
This a plausible situation, however I doubt most people would use this technique as they would either be trying to kick at it, or would be to afraid to go near its head.
Again plausible, but even less likely than the headlock maneuver. Some people have difficulties discerning leopards and tigers, so I imagine most are unaware of the fact that wolves have inflexible limbs.
For reasons beyond me most people don't seem to aim for these parts, when they deal with attacking animals; or humans for that matter.
I don't see how that's possible.
If you could drive away a determined wolf with a rock or a stick I doubt people from the medieval ages would be so fearful of them
Personally I think jaws capable of crunching through skulls is a pretty useful weapon.
If only it were so easy.
What are the chances of a lethal weapon lying in the middle of a natural environment? You can't simply assume they're fighting in a garage or gun shop just so it would be easier for the human.
Yes a race of physically weaks apes that mostly consists of overweight/underweight individuals, with skin that can be cut by paper!
|
|
|
Post by jumbo1 on Jul 25, 2012 6:40:21 GMT -5
It seems we agree someone like Karelin or Bruce Lee would beat a wolf in a fight, no? 1. news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1338&dat=19541231&id=BQNYAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ovYDAAAAIBAJ&pg=5628,6229420 BLIND man killed a wolf with bare hands. 2. Humans are weak? news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/wear/4746665.stm Woman lifted up a car to save friend. 3. I've posted dozens of articles where humans fought off Lions, tigers, or bears with nothing but their hands. These are animals far more formidable than wolves. 4. Humans are built for activities that require far more energy than those of a wolf. A wolf mostly walks and runs all day. A human can bench press 450 LBS, fold fry pans, tear books, and pound 100's of pushups. All of which require more power. 5. When wolves hunt ungulates, it's in large groups against sick, weak animals. So that's null and void here. 6. www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gl0JlXfUcOg wolf is intimidated by a small coyote. 7. Wolves are used to fighting other wolves who are just as morphologically restricted as they are. Something like a dexterous, intelligent human is a totally different ballgame. Everything else, I've just about covered as to why a man will win.
|
|
|
Post by Anomonyous on Jul 25, 2012 9:32:12 GMT -5
5. Who says the man has to be unarmed? He can grab a machete or hammer nearby and cudgel the wolf with it. To say a human must be unarmed is like saying, "a dog should be muzzled otherwise it can bite and that's unfair." It's totally false. If you were fighting a wolf and there happened to be a weapon nearby, would you throw it away just to "make it fair"? NO. You would use it against the wolf. That IS unfair! We are judging species by their fighting ability, stamina, strength, and ability to use intelligence IN COMBAT, not outside of it to make weapons. A 10 year old armed with a pistol against a wolf would be a mismatch, despite the boy's scrawny muscles compared to the wolf. You could easily beat a bear if you snatched up an elephant gun somewhere off the ground.
|
|
|
Post by Super Communist on Jul 25, 2012 9:52:32 GMT -5
Jumbo the reason these accounts seem to be so common is because everyone of these great feats are newsworthy, while getting killed by a bear is not that surprising. For example if a typical man where to get killed by cancer it wouldn't be reported, but if a healthy man got killed by something like the common cold, it probably would. So we cannot use these feats as they represent less than one percent of the population.
Perhaps but remember wolves are faster, more agile, arguably more durable, and their jaws are better at inflicting damage than punches, kicks, and grabs.
P.S. Folding frying pans is a superhuman feat.
Jumbo, predators prefer the weak and sick but they don't always hunt them down. Its not like every single herd of elk has a crippled youngster or a scabies infected adult.
I don't know fights between people usually have little to no intellect involved.
|
|
|
Post by jumbo1 on Jul 26, 2012 7:59:50 GMT -5
1. Ordinary humans are built to deal with extreme life-death situations such as here. weirdthings.com/2010/06/the-man-who-survived-10-shots-from-a-mexican-firing-squad-weirdest-survival-stories/ This was just some poor man from Mexico. Shot 10 times by an execution squad and STILL retains his senses enough to escape. I cannot imagine just how much more effective a soldier or martial artist would be in the same situation. 2. Due to our hands and legs, we can't defend our vital regions far more effectively than the wolf can. For example, we can hold the wolf's jaw shut and push them away. We can wrap a jacket around our arm, offer it to the wolf. Then when he bites it, gouge his eyes out. The number ways a man can exploit a wolf is insane. 3. If a man got a wolf into a rear naked choke, does the wolf have hands with which to pry it lose? Can it stop a man from gouging its eyes out or kicking its exposed ribs? The man on the other hand is more aware of the wolf's weapon and how to avoid/counter it. 4. Our biped stance actually provides better lateral movement and close quarter quickness than the wolf. www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1NZaRB0eas have you ever seen a wolf move as fast as these men? 5. A strike from a biped stance also produces full range of motion. We propel our entire mass into the strike www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w4rH6dFbb4 here 6. Solo wolves are easily scared. Did you see that vid where a coyote chased off a big male wolf? SC, you seriously need to start appreciating what our species is capable of as fighters.
|
|
|
Post by Anomonyous on Jul 26, 2012 8:05:32 GMT -5
A ranger also died from a single shot from a .22 caliber pistol to the arm. .22 LR firearms are certainly capable of inflicting lethal injuries, but they are better suited to target practice and rabbit hunting. There was also an account of a man killed by a chicken with a knife strapped to it, which is far less formidable than a wolf, even with a knife. I don't think a wolf that wants to kill you is going to be interested in a jacket, and anyway, as soon as the wolf realizes it's fallen into a trap it's immediately going to let go. Solo wolves are easily scared. Did you see that vid where a coyote chased off a big male wolf?
Wolves may be easy to fend off. Killing one in a fight would be a lot harder.
|
|
|
Post by jumbo1 on Jul 26, 2012 8:30:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Super Communist on Jul 26, 2012 9:00:00 GMT -5
Hypothetically we could, but our finicky nature tends to hold us back. My friend once told me a story about how he and a couple of his other pals nearly pissed themselves when the neighbors dog bit one of them. If a house pet can invoke that much fear in human imagine what a wolf could do.
It could bite his hand off before it happens.
Can't view youtube videos since I'm in china, but if it involves athletes its irrelevant.
When grown men stop crying like infants when they get bit on the arm by a seventy pound police dog, and I might think about it.
Most people aren't three hundred pound wrestlers.
|
|
|
Post by jumbo1 on Jul 26, 2012 9:31:36 GMT -5
1. An equal number of men and woman would not have panicked and stepped up to the challenge. Think about Sappers, Max security inmates, or firemen. These are men and woman who faced FAR FAR worse than an animal attack. They have seen their own share of death and loss of co-workers.
2. For a wolf to bite and also protect himself from the man's other arms requires him to change direction MIDAIR. Then go for the other limb. That breaks the laws of physics. Or he can let go of the limb he's holding to try and fend off your other fist. That also exposes him.
3. If he bites your hand, you have a microsecond to seize the wolf's tongue or shove your hand down his throat to force gag.
4. Having a weapon doesn't always mean the man is carrying a gun or a sword. If he snatched up a log or a piece of glass midfight then he'll use that against the wolf. Common sense.
5. Also there's plenty of cases where men killed dogs barehanded. That much is obvious.
|
|
|
Post by LeopJag on Jul 26, 2012 12:58:46 GMT -5
To be fair, that big guy would have had no training or experience in how to deal with an attacking dog...were as the dog has since it was a trained police dog if my memory serves me?
|
|
|
Post by Anomonyous on Jul 26, 2012 14:41:06 GMT -5
A wolf has experience bringing down prey and fighting other wolves so I don't think it'll be lacking in that department.
|
|
|
Post by Ultimategrid on Jul 26, 2012 16:36:58 GMT -5
I think it's decently fair to use a human that has combat training for fights like this. Whenever another animal is used, for example a tiger, everyone demands fit prime males for the individual doing the fight. No one suggests using a captive-bred tiger. I'd say a man of around 200lbs that is decently muscled and has enough combat experiences should be fair in these fights.
|
|
|
Post by Anomonyous on Jul 26, 2012 17:06:54 GMT -5
I think it'd be fair to simply have a prime fit human for this battle - after all, a man with combat experiences likely has a large psychological advantage as well as a physical and technique advantage. The standard human would simply flail his arms and legs about.
|
|
|
Post by jumbo1 on Jul 27, 2012 10:24:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Super Communist on Jul 27, 2012 10:53:58 GMT -5
^Yes perhaps one or two percent of the human population are able to remain relatively calm and rational during a life or death situation.
|
|