True length of "record" giant pythons.

[Wildside]

Originally Posted by Gungirl

When it comes to snakes I think the typical man rule applies... for every 8" they say it is we should assume its 3"......

lolololololol!!!!!!!!!!


My snake's bigger then ur snake!

[Danimal]

Don't hate me for this bro, but I think you should let this one go. This is one of those things that's not worth heating your blood up over. I let myself believe in giants although I am a realist and eventually I am forced accept the reality. It's a serenity prayer moment. I mean, I like to fish and well, I'm not admitting that my perception may have been slightly skewed in the past but I guess its possible....

[millertime89]

Originally Posted by Rogue628

Love the albino burm. How long is she? It's really hard to tell in that pic. She still has a nice bit of white to her.

If I had to guess, I would say around 12 ft, but she was never close enough to the glass for a good guesstimate.

Originally Posted by Gungirl

When it comes to snakes I think the typical man rule applies... for every 8" they say it is we should assume its 3"......

hahahahahahahahahahahaha, maybe not quite THAT much of a disparity, but its a fair point, humans do like to exaggerate a bit... ok a lot.

[millertime89]

Originally Posted by Danimal

Don't hate me for this bro, but I think you should let this one go. This is one of those things that's not worth heating your blood up over. I let myself believe in giants although I am a realist and eventually I am forced accept the reality. It's a serenity prayer moment. I mean, I like to fish and well, I'm not admitting that my perception may have been slightly skewed in the past but I guess its possible....

When getting the right info out there may well determine whether I'm allowed to keep my favorite snakes or not I'm going to spread the correct information around as much as possible. With all of the BS laws that people (and groups like the HSUS) are trying to get passed banning herps big and small I think this just might be something other keepers should consider as well.

[C5Chris]

One point I would like to bring up seeing as Titanoboa was mentioned and "possibility" of 25-30ft snakes..

When they discovered Titanoboa they not also discovered large turtles and crocodiles (or alligators I cant remember which) but also larger leaves on the plants as well and were able to deduce that they average temperature was about 7-8 degrees warmer, which allowed these species to grow so large.

Also you didn't have the human interference in the environment and eco system there is today so when you factor these things in, an ever shrinking ecosystem and cooler planet (although Im sure the global warming enthusiasts might debate this) I think the chances of finding anything that big is pretty slim to none.

But like it was mentioned before, youd have to have all the perfect elements, and a bunch of luck. Impossible.. im not sure. Just extremely unlikely.

[smy_749]

The level of oxygen in the atmosphere was significantly higher than it is now. Oxygen is the limiting factor in growth on this planet. Dragon flies used to be 3 feet long. Almost everything on our planet needs oxygen in to produce usable energy. Limit the oxygen, you limit usable energy, thus limiting growth. I won't go into it to deep, but you won't see anything like titanoboa or w.e its called, or mega shark or any of the stuff on discovery channel.

[lemon]

Here's my friend with my other big girl

[dave himself]

@ lemon mate she's a beauty what size is that girl

[Freebody]

Originally Posted by Aaron_S

I can blame them. If you can't handle it at full size then why at all? Why stunt and animal purely for OUR self gratification to keep it? That's a load of horseshit blaming it on politics and you and everyone else knows it!

That's PURE animal cruelty!

I read this and I cant disagree more, I think it purely ones own opinion, has nothing to do with animal cruelty, that's like saying 2 normal people give birth to a dwarf/little person, they should kill it so it cant reproduce the genetic of dwarfism if that's a word < lol, or to save the person the cruelty of living as a small person? or people should not love that person based only on the fact they are small, and overlook there qualities and personality, people should just move on and find something they like in a regular size body, this also has to do with millers post just ofter yours as well where he agrees, its the same with dwarf snakes, I Love retics, I love how they are known to be the most intelligent snakes, very alert, they are my favorite, I happen to own a dwarf retic and I love her very much and I take perfect care of her and enjoy her just the way she is, I don't think by me keeping her its cruel in anyway, so what she wont hit 20 feet, and has pretty much topped out at 11 or so, I don't think shes suffering from the cruelty of someone breeding her. I do agree with what you said about the breed generally being smaller as the year pass, just like you said everyone breeds smaller snakes to keep it legal to own ie why I got a dwarf. and over time snakes will be released in areas they can survive in breed out and inevitably the species will be smaller, but it has nothing to do with cruelty imho, just my 2 cents.

[smy_749]

Freebody, your example is irrelevant :P

If you bred 2 normal retics and they had an freak baby who was very small, fine.

But what about if you marry a very short woman, with the intent to have a shorter child. And you teach your children to marry short women/men, so that they can have short children as well.

These dwarfs are being produced intentionally, not accidentally, through selective breeding. Giving birth to a dwarf is just genetic mishap, not selective/intentional.

And yes, humans are stubborn/selfish, and so long as it appeals to our needs, animals will always take the back seat.

I don't know if the snake suffers in any way, though I doubt it. (I don't his fellow retics make fun of him at school) but its just about the fact that we probably would go to the extent of breeding something which suffers, for our own pleasure. (like the albino niles/iguanas who can barely see if anything at all)

[Freebody]

Originally Posted by smy_749

Freebody, your example is irrelevant :P

If you bred 2 normal retics and they had an freak baby who was very small, fine.

But what about if you marry a very short woman, with the intent to have a shorter child. And you teach your children to marry short women/men, so that they can have short children as well.

These dwarfs are being produced intentionally, not accidentally, through selective breeding. Giving birth to a dwarf is just genetic mishap, not selective/intentional.

And yes, humans are stubborn/selfish, and so long as it appeals to our needs, animals will always take the back seat.

I don't know if the snake suffers in any way, though I doubt it. (I don't his fellow retics make fun of him at school) but its just about the fact that we probably would go to the extent of breeding something which suffers, for our own pleasure. (like the albino niles/iguanas who can barely see if anything at all)

how do you figure it not relevant lol its the same thing, someone found and adult retic that was very small, they realized by breeding it, that it produced much smaller adults, after 3 succesfull breeding they can now call it a dwarf, or whatever trait it has proven to find, this is how morphs come to be, and with the success of the baby outcome they can determine is its codom or recesive traits, dwarf/little people is a codom train in humans if im correct not sure 100%, but it has been proven that dwarf is a genetic anomaly, people who have children and either of the parents are dwarf, its a known fact you run a high chance of having dwarf/little people children of your own, im not talking about normal short/tall people! LOL im talking about the genetics of dwarf/ little people, the same trait found in dwarf snakes. actually in humans dwarf/little people actually suffer lots of health problems due to this genetic anomaly, but even then I don't think either is cruelty, so said person meeting a dwarf person falling in love with them, decide to have children, knowing full well you very possibly will be bringing dwarf children into the world is cruel? same thing as having a dwarf snake and breeding it, knowing full well you will produce dwarf snakes is cruel, thus my points, either is not cruel at all. its a personal choice, you find it sick to bring said dwarfism into the world, or you don't, its not a matter of cruelty it a person choice.

[smy_749]

Originally Posted by Freebody

how do you figure it not relevant lol its the same thing, someone found and adult retic that was very small, they realized by breeding it, that it produced much smaller adults, after 3 succesfull breeding they can now call it a dwarf, and with the success of the baby outcome they can determine is itc codom or recesive traits, dwarf/little people is a codom train in humans if im correct not sure 100%, but it has been proven that dwarf is a genetic anomaly, people who have children and either of the parents are dwarf, its a known fact you run a high chance of having dwarf/little people children of your own, im not talking about short people! LOL im stated dwarf/ little people, the same trait as dwarf snakes. so meeting a dwarf person falling in love with them, and having children knowing full well you very possibly will be bringing dwarf children into the world is the same thing as having a dwarf snake and breeding it, knowing full well you will produce dwarf snakes, thus my points, either is not cruel at all.

I don't think its 'cruel' because I don't think the snake suffers. But it is different. If a person chooses to have a baby with another dwarf, thats fine, because they chose it.

The problem is that we, humans, are choosing for the snakes, based on OUR interested. Again, I don't think its cruel because I'm not aware if there's any suffering going on with regards to the snake.

But your example is more like, me or you, of normal height, making 2 dwarfs have a baby. The retic doesn't pick.

[Freebody]

at the end of the day it a choice, I can choose to never bring dwarf babies in the world by not procreating with a dwarf/little person, unless the gene is already in my blood, a dwarf little person can choose not to procreate and adopt children, I can choose not to breed dwarf snakes, as to not bring dwarf snakes into the world. there truly is no difference. I can see your point tho, if the babies from the forced breeding had a lot of side effects like Jag syndrome I would consider it cruel, I have jags and will breed my jag, but I do find it a little cruel at the end of the day as the babies could suffer, but in dwarf snakes there is no risk of suffering. ie not cruel lol

[smy_749]

Originally Posted by smy_749

I don't think its 'cruel' because I don't think the snake suffers. But it is different. If a person chooses to have a baby with another dwarf, thats fine, because they chose it.

The problem is that we, humans, are choosing for the snakes, based on OUR interested. Again, I don't think its cruel because I'm not aware if there's any suffering going on with regards to the snake.

But your example is more like, me or you, of normal height, making 2 dwarfs have a baby. The retic doesn't pick.

My point is humans are selfish. If there was a gene that produced animals without eyes. Or animals without teeth. We'd still produce them as long as they looked cool to us.

[Freebody]

I do agree