User talk:69.237.201.14

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, 69.237.201.14, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Jwinius (talk) 22:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Python reticulatus

Although I have no doubt that your edits to Python reticulatus have been in good faith, I've been reverting them because the premise you wish to promulgate -- that constricting snakes, particularly the largest pythons, crush the bones of their prey -- is in fact a popular myth. You cannot provide any reliable references for this theory because there have never been any actual evidence, such as like X-ray photographs, to back it up. If any bones are ever broken in the process of constriction, this is accidental and very rare. This particular myth (and there are many snake myths) probably arose from the fact that when a snake regurgitates a fresh meal, it tends to look long and slender. But that's simply because any fur is flattened, while arms and legs are directed backwards along the length of the body. This may give the illusion that prey is crushed, but this result is basically the same with any snake, constrictor or not.

In addition, it would be physically impossible for even the largest python to "completely break virtually every bone" in a victim's body, but even if it was it would be a waste of energy for the snake. Instead, what constricting snakes do is wait for the prey's movements to stop, including breathing and possibly heartbeat. After that they relax and start to look for the head -- the point from which they begin to swallow. Snakes are able to engulf prey that is seemingly to large because their jaws are articulated and loosely connected, allowing them move apart to produce a much wider gape. This is a much more efficient solution than crushing prey down to size. --Jwinius (talk) 22:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

With all do respect you do not site any sources in your rebuttal, and therefore I can only accept that as hearsay - which is what your have relegated my claims to; and to be completely frank with you, I was quoting a VERY recent documentary on Anacondas & Reticulated Pythons from either the Science Channel, National Geographic, Animal Planet, or the Discovery channel (I incessantly watch them all lol - so i couldn't recall exactly which station it was) - It is THEY that made the claim that the bones ARE actually Crushed by the snake. And no offense, but I have accept them as a more reputable source than you in the field, only because they are Not amateurs but are a legitimate amalgamation of scientists in this particular field. Now, I would have loved to have been able to cite the source (the show) but unfortunately I did not DVR that show that day, but i was hoping with the scale and scope of Wikipedia that one who might have either seen, or had a hand in the production of the show would be corroborate the insert with a reference. Perhaps I should have just put up a "Citation Needed" field, in hindsight. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.237.201.14 (talk) 09:51, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Although I too have spent countless hours watching watching many of these same television programs, you must recognize that these shows are produced primarily for entertainment purposes and do not necessarily reflect reality in the scientific sense. For example, programs made for the National Geographic Channel do not undergo rigorous fact checking, as do the articles written for National Geographic Magazine (with which it is loosely affiliated). Therefore, what is presented on television must always be taken with a grain of salt. It is dangerous to assume that what is said on TV is always the truth; it is simply not a substitute for reading books. As for references, I've managed to find three for you:
  • Mehrtens JM. 1987. Living Snakes of the World in Color. New York: Sterling Publishers. 480 pp. ISBN 0-8069-6460-X. Page 18:
"They do kill their prey by constriction, but do not "crush" the food animal..."
  • Stidworthy J. 1974. Snakes of the World. Grosset & Dunlap Inc. 160 pp. ISBN 0-448-11856-4. Page 45:
"The prey is never crushed to death, or even noticably deformed before it is eaten. Death comes by suffocation, the victim being unable to move its ribs and breathe while it is being constricted."
  • Carr A. 1963. The Reptiles. Life Nature Library. Time-Life Books, New York. 192 pp. LCCCN 63-12781. Page 55:
"The speed with which the coils are applied is striking and the force they apply is great. There is rarely any crushing of bones, however, ..."
Doubtless there are many other books on snakes also explain how the "crushing to death" notion is a myth. I challenge you to find at least three reasonably serious books, written by reputable authors, that claim the opposite: that constricting snakes actually do crush their prey to death, breaking many bones in the process. (PS -- Please answer here, as I've temporarily added your talk page to my watchlist). --Jwinius (talk) 13:35, 20 January 2008 (UTC)