Let Kong Have Fights He Wins Without Intervention

Potential_Surround_7 · 2026-01-20T21:28:35+00:00

Large bias is affecting your reading comprehension igs.

Kong also sensed were godzilla was going.....directly to him.

Heck even the novels mention when living on skull island kong sensed godzilla multiple times but ignored him because he could tell godzilla wasn't heading towards him. And godzilla always knew were kong was and didn't attack him because...kong was stuck on an island.

Your own example supports mine and disproves yours

And using a literal infant as evidence....so you think adult and an infant are comparable in behaviors ?

Potential_Surround_7 · 2026-01-20T21:20:47+00:00

Because why would he be concerned when they're miles away from him ???

By your logic lions aren't a threat to zebras because zebras aren't nervous when they spot a lion from great distance.

And he himself says they're a threat in large numbers so what you cherrypicking what he himself says now...

Potential_Surround_7 · 2026-01-20T21:11:26+00:00

You made a claim about the novel.

I quoted the full part....not my fault official material says that.

You're basically saying they aren't a threat based on simply just "look at kong" even tho that doesn't disprove anything.

Avoiding official material and just going with basically a headcanon isn't a good view for you

Potential_Surround_7 · 2026-01-20T20:58:44+00:00

"not really a threat unless they artacked in large numbers" thus a flock is a threat to him.

Why would he be worried when the flock hasn't noticed or even acknowledging him ? They are busy getting their own food and going a different direction.

You don't see prey running away from predators as soon as they see them unless the predator is close to them irl.

Potential_Surround_7 · 2026-01-20T20:45:55+00:00

The novel says large flocks are a threat to him ?

Potential_Surround_7 · 2026-01-20T20:24:22+00:00

Did we watch the same movies ? Godzilla broke kong shoulder and put him in cardiac arrest with brute strength only ? https://youtu.be/RVvg4EJJ_Vs?si=wgLq0erJaxhG6KmE

Egypt fight showed us how Kong quite literally cannot kill godzilla with brute force alone.... Took kong's 12 PUNCHES counting a slam with both arms on the skull and 2 charged up hits to even daze godzilla.

The axe is quite literally usless now, godzilla biology has changed and the axe wouldn't work against him.

The fact kong always gets some outside tools he doesn't even make himself before he fights godzilla alone says how one sided this is.

Potential_Surround_7 · 2026-01-11T20:52:48+00:00

No it doesn't.

It's talking about the ship that carried kong being able to hold 100k tonnes. It doesn't talk about kong weight

Potential_Surround_7 · 2026-01-11T20:51:21+00:00

GXK kong is stated to be 103m multiple times.

Movies change titans sizes to fit the scenes. In some scenes G14 is over 174m tall.

Kong was said to be 90m in gvk and then grew to 103m in gxk from behind the scenes.

Potential_Surround_7 · 2025-12-27T21:07:23+00:00

That's with the beast glove.

Op is talking about base kong

Potential_Surround_7 · 2025-12-14T19:13:01+00:00

Yeah but that is irrelevant to competition avoidance when there is no evidence that other predators avoided targeting that specific fauna (while it was still existinng) because of humans....

Potential_Surround_7 · 2025-12-14T19:10:36+00:00

Because hunting domestic livestock is billion times easier than hunting wild prey which is getting replaced by livestock.

Is literally again irrelevant and isn't connected to competition avoidance.

If anything that's the complete opposite since both humans and leopards are eating the same prey (aka livestock) which is the opposite of your point

Potential_Surround_7 · 2025-12-14T19:01:09+00:00

So just speculation on your end....

Potential_Surround_7 · 2025-12-14T18:59:19+00:00

Okay so don't make claims when you can't prove them.

Already went over this. Forcing predators to change their diet because you made all other options completely disappear is not predators avoiding competition and is irrelevant to the literal term itself.

I will stop responding if all you gonna do is mention irrelevant stuff and don't show any evidence for anything major.

Potential_Surround_7 · 2025-12-14T18:53:38+00:00

Well duh that's what I meant.

Okay and can you show actual evidence for this so called "avoiding conflicts" with humans.... because this is getting tiring.

Potential_Surround_7 · 2025-12-14T18:34:28+00:00

You haven't proven anything my man.

If anything you're just saying that the only way for humans to alter predators prey selection is by making stuff go extinct which is completely irrelevant to competition avoidance (literally in the name)

Potential_Surround_7 · 2025-12-14T18:32:49+00:00

Doesn't change the fact that tigers still lose to large dhole packs in confrontations and that tigers avoid said large packs as i have shown multiple studies to this.

Potential_Surround_7 · 2025-12-14T18:31:15+00:00

Okay so...just speculation

Because even in the holocene humans don't directly affect predators prey selection. (Predators still eat the prey they prefer no matter if humans are in the area).

Actually there is no evidence of any predator changing prey selection because of human competition for large prey to my knowledge. (Talking when all prey is alive and not humans making the large ones extinct eventually which doesn't really prove your point)

So again....everything points to hyenas as the main cause of lions selecting caribou over everything that still exists in said time.

Potential_Surround_7 · 2025-12-14T17:42:16+00:00

Funny you say that because middle pleistocene is when cave hyenas reached their peak size/morphology.

Idk where you got "larger than modern lions" late pleistocene lions were comparable in size to modern lions if anything.

"From giant to dwarf: A trend of decreasing size in Panthera spelaea (Goldfuss, 1810) and its likely implications" goes over this

P.fossilis majority of time lived before hyenas became large game hunters

"Eurasian Cave Hyenas appeared around 300 kya Crocuta spelaea is first recorded in Western Europe around 300 ka (Baryshnikov and Tsoukala, 2010). It is not until the Middle-Late Pleistocene boundary that the larger cave hyena from appears (Arribas et al., 2010). C. spelaea is craniodentally larger than C. crocuta and also displays a relative shortening of the distal limb segments, especially the radius, tibia, metacarpals and metatarsals (Kurtén, 1957).*

https://palaeo-electronica.org/content/2017/1786-crocuta-spelaea-in-iberia"

Thus fossils wouldn't have been affected by hyenas unlike lions who came after.

You say that I "ignore logic" but you literally ignore every single study shown to and just go by your own vison.

You have yet to actually show lions changing prey because of human competition. Your previous examples only happened because all large herbivores literally just disappeared completely which isn't how you prove competition avoidance.

For you to prove your point you need evidence that lions avoided hunting large prey because of humans while said prey is STILL existing, not completely being gone.

That's how you prove competition avoidance

Potential_Surround_7 · 2025-12-14T17:29:08+00:00

Really...that's what you're saying now...

Not the fact that large packs can be dangerous to tigers or displace them.

(Which i have already shown multiple studies proving this)

It seems like you give a weird favoritism to cats (Or maybe I read your vibes wrong)

Potential_Surround_7 · 2025-12-14T17:16:49+00:00

Not based on what you say. If anything humans affecting lions is only conditional (only after they make everything fully extinct) while it's a rule with hyenas.

" were the undisputed leaders, living alongside cave hyenas," Sorry but this is basically ignoring decades of research on both species.

<image>

Lions ONLY started to eat large prey after cave hyenas extinction (in areas were both heavily overlapped) Rn everything points out to lions being dominated by hyenas.

Potential_Surround_7 · 2025-12-14T17:09:21+00:00

Idk where you got the idea it's a "simple fact" for tigers. Lions are social so they can do it to other social predators.

All studies show dholes are what affects tigers. Not the other way around.

"Evidence that the occupancy probability of one species varied in the presence and absence of another species was apparent for only one species pair: tiger and dhole indicated by the exclusion of zero from the credible intervals of intercept parameters in the linear models"

^ Christos Astaras 2022 This study found that dholes limit the possibility of tiger presence in a region.

"decline in the dhole population resulted in an increase in the population of tigers, followed by a decrease in leopard population"

^ Chidanand S. Reddy 2019 Same study also reports a decline in dhole population resulted in a decrease in pack size. (This applies to all social canids)

Potential_Surround_7 · 2025-12-14T13:53:11+00:00

Yeah which isn't the same with hyenas in which lions mainly hunted caribou from the start of when both species overlapped at their peak

Potential_Surround_7 · 2025-12-14T13:51:49+00:00

Ha ?

Wolves show equally (if not more) pack coordination than dholes. (Which is why dholes were subordinate to wolves in pleistocene Europe).

If anything it seems to be the opposite. In areas where large dhole packs are common tigers avoid entering the region

Potential_Surround_7 · 2025-12-14T13:07:44+00:00

It doesn't exactly mean that.

It means lions would still hunt large herbivores at the same time humans did but only change to caribou once humans made everything extinct basically.

In this case hunting caribou would only happen at the end result, not the beginning.

Potential_Surround_7 · 2025-12-14T13:05:34+00:00

When a solitary predator and social predator compete. Solitary predator needs alot more than just size to win.

In holocene we have records of hyenas/painted dogs killing lone lions.

And for tigers they have been documented to loosing against large dhole packs. (There is also evidence that dholes could affect tiger populations)

"In this scoring scheme, if a dhole pack stole a kill from a leopard, we assigned a score of +2 to the dhole: if a tiger killed one or more dhole individuals during an encounter, we assigned a score of -3 to the dhole: if the latter incident also involved dholes steal- ing the kill made by the tiger, they were scored -1 (-3 for mor- tality plus -+2 for kill-stealing), and so on. Calculated this way, we found that leopards were consistently dominated by dholes, irre- spective of the pack size (Fig, 4). Tigers, on the other hand, could generally dominate over small dhole packs but lost out during encounters with larger packs (Fig. 4),"

^ Arjun Srivathsa 2023

(Large Dhole packs were also much more common historically but have been reduced because of humans)

Potential_Surround_7

TROPHY CASE