Comments by "" (@CYMotorsport) on "Animal Facts That I Got WRONG" video.

  1. 1:10 “bite force of 650 pounds per square inch” all due respect that statement alone is ridiculous. Psi is not a unit of force. Anyone using psi isn’t measuring correctly. You could back into it from newtons but you’re reporting of bite force should always be directly in newtons. Silly things happen when converting to psi but idk why anyone would talk about bite force in psi that’s very strange. And the tiger stans upset about this I truly doubt have read the research. First off, cite what SPECIFICALLY you’re talking about. Are you talking about DrBarr’s research? Also shown in “dangerous encounters” from 2005? The data wasn’t wrong just ppl are lazy and dumb. They make the limitations VERY clear. For instance Barr says a crocodile’s bite force is just 2500 psi. Which off the rip psi - no. But 2500 ? On first glance that’s LAUGHABLE. Just look at modern reputable, repeatable studies. Bc that’s the key - repeatable. Look at the methodology. Look at the subjects used for the lion test. Look at that for the hyena. People claiming it was a young lion. How do you know? You don’t. They actually don’t know the age. Some lions mature as early as 3 and that’s not that rare. Many estimates blindly think the lion tested was 2. So 1 year off? You’re that confident in your ability to guess without more info? Fact is, randomly saying some bullsht like lions are 1000psi is just as worthless. You’re only saying that to bring it to parity. But who the hell said 1000 was correct? I’ll prove my point. Especially re: Why I said ppl were lazy. Did you know Dr Barr retested bites especially bc the croc seemed low? Exactly. The number skyrocketed to 6000psi. Read that again, 6000. That’s more than 2.5x different arithmetically.. Yet we’re using their 1000 psi on hyena still haha brilliant stuff. Notice how when people cite this they don’t understand that the methodology does matter for manner of the bite itself. For instance how they tested dogs only focused on front of the jaw pressure, which isn’t even bite force. But are your canine teeth in the very front of your mouth ? Of course not. Also same issue measuring shark which we now of course can get a better sense through proper sensors. How hyena bite and attack is different than how you’ll test the bite force of a crocodile or tiger or lion. While I adore animals I wouldn’t call myself a member of the community and really it comes down to how little rigor is done before bringing stuff like this to an audience. Your correct number of subs means nothing. So let’s that carry over into how you speak on animals especially research. It’s as simple as citing the study or including the footnote on screen. Yes it’s more work but so is being responsible when sharing data. I challenge you there. Bc I really do like this channel but you and many others do that a lot. Atleast bro if you cite the study overtly, I can go read it myself and you have plausible deniability. But if you cited the study in the first place you’d see how silly Dr. Barr’s methodology was and you’d arm ppl with the ability to educate themselves and in turn you yourself on why in the Very least it’s factually inaccurate or atleast unreliable. I can’t even say inaccurate though bc I don’t know the age of subject nor do I know the variation or bite force by age and how much that may or may not deviate from that of full maturity. Same goes to the development of cubs fully in the wild. How much of the jaw power atrophies under captivity where blind studies are run. See what I mean? Citing 1,000 just to parity is another red herring. Yall need to clean it up, dig deep on methodology, and what make sense then explain. Bc other ppl lazily use each others video as a source as you did in the first place already to say 650
    1