i've seen this in the wild before whether this particular pic is true or not. Even done it myself (with my hands, my muzzle is kinda short lol) Try it in slow moving streams, be quiet and still as it can take awhile. Salmon are easy, catfish are hard. utahu.stumbleupon.com
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Wed, 10/24/2007 - 20:30.
A wolf can swim, a wolf needs food, so many salmon in the river that you would be blind to not see them, Wolf catches its dinner.
Where's the surprise? I dont find it odd at all.
Congratulations to the photographer though, a nice set of shots.
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 23:48.
My Border collie plucked a fish out of a pond in front of witnesses. Unbelievable at the time, she had spent years watching the fish swim around when we would be sitting on the dock. Just had opportunity when the water was finally level with the dock. Dogs and wolves smart and lovable.
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 23:15.
Being an Alaskan I can vouch for this anomoly. Actually there are many animals that will take advantage of this plentiful and rich food source. Wolves and foxes are usually on the edge of the water anyways stealing scraps the bears leave behind. Only a matter of time before they go after the food themselves!
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 21:13.
If you will look closely, you will see a wolf that is skinny and that needs protein. Seeing other animals find it quickly and easily, and finding a place where the fish have to pause before moving further upstream, it found a location it could catch fish in, and does.
Why do people have to see things that don't exist before they see the things the pictures put before your very eyes?
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 20:28.
Apparently, in addition to being the sort of person who thinks that kind of cheap wordplay is clever, you've never actually tried to "Photochop" anything yourself. I do, every day, and while it's a good tool, if this is a hoax, it's an incredibly elaborate one taking up to several dozen hours to complete. Personally , I have better things to do than find a half dozen similar looking pictures of water-logged wolves and appropriately posed fish, match them all up to the different water ripples, lighting patterns and colors (at different angles and distances to boot), all before painstakingly painting them in so there are no noticeable edges or lighting discrepancies. It's possible, but so is growing a tumor on your ass with it's own functioning eyeball.
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 19:11.
"several dozen hours"? this is done in not even half an hour...
find a photo stream of wolf jumpin in river.
find photos of fishes in google images
clone in togheter badly just as the OP did and voila.
but of course that it you "several dozen hours" to do this fake? LOL!!! p0wn3d.
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 21:29.
"several dozen hours"? this is done in not even half an hour...
find a photo stream of wolf jumpin in river.
find photos of fishes in google images
clone in togheter badly just as the OP did and voila.
but of course that it you "several dozen hours" to do this fake? LOL!!! p0wn3d.
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 21:25.
I'd get into the unlikelihood of such a series of photos occurring, and the pointlessness of manipulating them further, but this sort of makes it unnecessary. Turn six, please.
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Sun, 09/30/2007 - 04:11.
Apparently, in addition to being the sort of person who thinks that kind of wordplay is clever, you've never seriously tried to "Photochop" anything yourself. I do, every day, and while it's a good tool, if this is a hoax, it's an incredibly elaborate one taking up to several dozen hours to complete. Personally , I have better things to do than find a half dozen similar looking pictures of water-logged wolves and appropriately action-posed fish, match them all up to the different water ripples, lighting patterns and colors (at different angles and distances to boot), all before painstakingly painting them in so there are no noticeable edges or lighting discrepancies. It's possible, but so is growing a tumor on your ass with it's own functioning eyeball.
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 19:10.
See if you can follow this logic, one baby step at a time:
1. There is a wolf that's able to get around in the water better than other wolves can (because it has slightly less fur to slow it down, say)
2. such a wolf will likely catch more fish
3. a well-fed wolf has the luxury of living to reproduction age and making more babies
4. these babies will also be good at getting around in the water, and therefore catch more fish, and therefore leave more babies of their own, carrying their genes.
5. several generations down the road, maybe there will even be some wolves that are able to "swim". These wolves will therefore be better able to catch fish (and eat better, and make more babies and pass down the "swimming" gene).
6. Fast forward a few eons and you now have an animal that spends more time in water than on land. Something like a seal, perhaps.
7. Fast forward some more and you may end up with something like a dolphin or a whale (water mammals that were once land mammals).
Funny thing about speciation events is that we can only recognize them in distant hindsight. At the time of their occurrence, they don't really look like anything special. No swirl of angels descends from the heavens trumpeting the birth of a new species.
If you can understand this, then you understand 95% of everything there is to understand about the essence of evolution. Congratulations! That wasn't so difficult, was it?
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 18:32.
There's nothing in this behavior that suggests any kind of reproductive isolation, which would be necessary to ensure speciation.
This is perhaps a behavioral adaptation (versus an anatomical one) on the part of the wolves who engage in feeding on running salmon, but remember that salmon don't run all year long. Wolves still have to be fully capable of feeding terrestrially rather than just aquatically, as a result.
I suggest that while you've some grasp of evolution through natural selection, it hardly constitutes 95% of what there is to understand. I recommend further reading of works by Richard Dawkins, Stephen Jay Gould, and David Quammen's "The Song of the Dodo".
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 17:16.
Q1. Are you suggesting wolf-like creatures existed on land before seal-like creatures evolved from them, distinct from other species that evolved the other way from water to land?
Q2. When you use that term evolution, do you extrapolate the ideas you presented to include the functions of the cell? i.e. do you take evolution at the species level, back to a big bang theory or stop well short of that. Where?
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 18:57.
A2: Evolution in this context means the changes in living things over time, it is an issue of biology. The Big Bang is a cosmology question. So evolution goes back to the first living things which were likely single celled organisms. There is plenty of evidence for this: you can read the many FAQs at www.talkorigins.org, each of those FAQs have references to the original research papers.
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 19:48.
evolution has absolutely nothing to do with it and the animal just has good common hunting sense and the athletic prowess to achieve success. Geeezzz, you evolutionists will take anything you can to try to prove your viewpoint even though you never will. Quit trying to find a way to replace God.
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Sun, 10/21/2007 - 13:27.
exactly. I have a husky mix who has picked live fish out of a local marina before. they are smaller than this one too, therefore making a harder target. this wolf just got some food - no need to get into photoshop or evolution - a dog ate a fish. these are some nice pictures of it.
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 19:02.
I don't want to have this person's post hijacked onto some conversation about evolution. To be there and see the wolf hunt those fish would be an amazing experience- to get it on film, even more so. It obviously isn't photo shopped as some have suggested. There are some details present that show that. Another person I talked to while fishing a few years ago, said he had seen it before as well.
I believe intelligent creatures can figure out/decide what is needed to survive when times are tough. Hunger and the desire to live have a way of bringing that out in us. But I don't believe that we can just decide "hey, I better go live in the water now" and that will cause our lungs and other physical characteristics will evolve into gathering oxygen from water. If that was the case, then the other mammals wouldn't have chosen to go extinct. There are way too many holes in the theory and in my belief, evolutionists skip over those holes trying to prove their "postulates" which are truthfully just theories. To each his own as we all have free will to choose.
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Sun, 10/21/2007 - 14:38.
This series of photos must represent the mythological creature seen on the front of all U. Alaska-Anchorage jerseys. The mighty Seawolf. It can't be that rare, or somebody wouldn't have named a sports team after the amble hunter. Check out the jersey yourself at http://www.goseawolves.com.
And it's divine intervention to even give this team a prayer in the WCHA.
replySubmitted by Anonymous on Fri, 12/14/2007 - 06:58.
i've seen this in the wild before whether this particular pic is true or not. Even done it myself (with my hands, my muzzle is kinda short lol) Try it in slow moving streams, be quiet and still as it can take awhile. Salmon are easy, catfish are hard. utahu.stumbleupon.com
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 10/24/2007 - 20:30.They even narrated it and everything
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjVSyQkqZ7s
Klink
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 09/30/2007 - 20:02.I love how there's always some jackass that says something is photoshopped. This isn't some extreme out-of-the-ordinary event.
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 09/30/2007 - 14:26.A wolf can swim, a wolf needs food, so many salmon in the river that you would be blind to not see them, Wolf catches its dinner.
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 23:48.Where's the surprise? I dont find it odd at all.
Congratulations to the photographer though, a nice set of shots.
My Border collie plucked a fish out of a pond in front of witnesses. Unbelievable at the time, she had spent years watching the fish swim around when we would be sitting on the dock. Just had opportunity when the water was finally level with the dock. Dogs and wolves smart and lovable.
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 23:15.Being an Alaskan I can vouch for this anomoly. Actually there are many animals that will take advantage of this plentiful and rich food source. Wolves and foxes are usually on the edge of the water anyways stealing scraps the bears leave behind. Only a matter of time before they go after the food themselves!
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 21:13.shame!!
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Mon, 10/15/2007 - 18:09.If you will look closely, you will see a wolf that is skinny and that needs protein. Seeing other animals find it quickly and easily, and finding a place where the fish have to pause before moving further upstream, it found a location it could catch fish in, and does.
Why do people have to see things that don't exist before they see the things the pictures put before your very eyes?
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 20:28.looks horrid, photochopped
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 18:39.you can find the video of the same wolf @ ktuu.com
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 09/30/2007 - 06:05.Apparently, in addition to being the sort of person who thinks that kind of cheap wordplay is clever, you've never actually tried to "Photochop" anything yourself. I do, every day, and while it's a good tool, if this is a hoax, it's an incredibly elaborate one taking up to several dozen hours to complete. Personally , I have better things to do than find a half dozen similar looking pictures of water-logged wolves and appropriately posed fish, match them all up to the different water ripples, lighting patterns and colors (at different angles and distances to boot), all before painstakingly painting them in so there are no noticeable edges or lighting discrepancies. It's possible, but so is growing a tumor on your ass with it's own functioning eyeball.
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 19:11."several dozen hours"? this is done in not even half an hour...
find a photo stream of wolf jumpin in river.
find photos of fishes in google images
clone in togheter badly just as the OP did and voila.
but of course that it you "several dozen hours" to do this fake? LOL!!! p0wn3d.
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 21:29."several dozen hours"? this is done in not even half an hour...
find a photo stream of wolf jumpin in river.
find photos of fishes in google images
clone in togheter badly just as the OP did and voila.
but of course that it you "several dozen hours" to do this fake? LOL!!! p0wn3d.
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 21:25."LOL!!! p0wn3d."
I'd get into the unlikelihood of such a series of photos occurring, and the pointlessness of manipulating them further, but this sort of makes it unnecessary. Turn six, please.
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 09/30/2007 - 04:11.Apparently, in addition to being the sort of person who thinks that kind of wordplay is clever, you've never seriously tried to "Photochop" anything yourself. I do, every day, and while it's a good tool, if this is a hoax, it's an incredibly elaborate one taking up to several dozen hours to complete. Personally , I have better things to do than find a half dozen similar looking pictures of water-logged wolves and appropriately action-posed fish, match them all up to the different water ripples, lighting patterns and colors (at different angles and distances to boot), all before painstakingly painting them in so there are no noticeable edges or lighting discrepancies. It's possible, but so is growing a tumor on your ass with it's own functioning eyeball.
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 19:10.Last time I try to communicate on an office machine; double posting is an egregious sin, for which I must go castigate myself. Excuse me...
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 19:27.Can you point out the specific things which make this look 'horrid' and 'photochopped'?
You're a douche.
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 18:55.See if you can follow this logic, one baby step at a time:
1. There is a wolf that's able to get around in the water better than other wolves can (because it has slightly less fur to slow it down, say)
2. such a wolf will likely catch more fish
3. a well-fed wolf has the luxury of living to reproduction age and making more babies
4. these babies will also be good at getting around in the water, and therefore catch more fish, and therefore leave more babies of their own, carrying their genes.
5. several generations down the road, maybe there will even be some wolves that are able to "swim". These wolves will therefore be better able to catch fish (and eat better, and make more babies and pass down the "swimming" gene).
6. Fast forward a few eons and you now have an animal that spends more time in water than on land. Something like a seal, perhaps.
7. Fast forward some more and you may end up with something like a dolphin or a whale (water mammals that were once land mammals).
Funny thing about speciation events is that we can only recognize them in distant hindsight. At the time of their occurrence, they don't really look like anything special. No swirl of angels descends from the heavens trumpeting the birth of a new species.
If you can understand this, then you understand 95% of everything there is to understand about the essence of evolution. Congratulations! That wasn't so difficult, was it?
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 18:32.There's nothing in this behavior that suggests any kind of reproductive isolation, which would be necessary to ensure speciation.
This is perhaps a behavioral adaptation (versus an anatomical one) on the part of the wolves who engage in feeding on running salmon, but remember that salmon don't run all year long. Wolves still have to be fully capable of feeding terrestrially rather than just aquatically, as a result.
I suggest that while you've some grasp of evolution through natural selection, it hardly constitutes 95% of what there is to understand. I recommend further reading of works by Richard Dawkins, Stephen Jay Gould, and David Quammen's "The Song of the Dodo".
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 17:16.Q1. Are you suggesting wolf-like creatures existed on land before seal-like creatures evolved from them, distinct from other species that evolved the other way from water to land?
Q2. When you use that term evolution, do you extrapolate the ideas you presented to include the functions of the cell? i.e. do you take evolution at the species level, back to a big bang theory or stop well short of that. Where?
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 18:57.A1: we have plenty of evidence for the existence of four legged mammals before seals and such. And we have good evidence for which of those led to seals, which to sea lions, and which to whales. This has some good stuff on whales: http://www.talkorigins.org/features/whales/
This has a little on seals: http://oceanlink.island.net/oinfo/seals.html
A2: Evolution in this context means the changes in living things over time, it is an issue of biology. The Big Bang is a cosmology question. So evolution goes back to the first living things which were likely single celled organisms. There is plenty of evidence for this: you can read the many FAQs at www.talkorigins.org, each of those FAQs have references to the original research papers.
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 19:48.evolution has absolutely nothing to do with it and the animal just has good common hunting sense and the athletic prowess to achieve success. Geeezzz, you evolutionists will take anything you can to try to prove your viewpoint even though you never will. Quit trying to find a way to replace God.
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 10/21/2007 - 13:27.exactly. I have a husky mix who has picked live fish out of a local marina before. they are smaller than this one too, therefore making a harder target. this wolf just got some food - no need to get into photoshop or evolution - a dog ate a fish. these are some nice pictures of it.
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 19:02.actually, that's how it is postulated marine mammals evolved.
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/29/2007 - 19:28.I don't want to have this person's post hijacked onto some conversation about evolution. To be there and see the wolf hunt those fish would be an amazing experience- to get it on film, even more so. It obviously isn't photo shopped as some have suggested. There are some details present that show that. Another person I talked to while fishing a few years ago, said he had seen it before as well.
I believe intelligent creatures can figure out/decide what is needed to survive when times are tough. Hunger and the desire to live have a way of bringing that out in us. But I don't believe that we can just decide "hey, I better go live in the water now" and that will cause our lungs and other physical characteristics will evolve into gathering oxygen from water. If that was the case, then the other mammals wouldn't have chosen to go extinct. There are way too many holes in the theory and in my belief, evolutionists skip over those holes trying to prove their "postulates" which are truthfully just theories. To each his own as we all have free will to choose.
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 10/21/2007 - 14:38.This series of photos must represent the mythological creature seen on the front of all U. Alaska-Anchorage jerseys. The mighty Seawolf. It can't be that rare, or somebody wouldn't have named a sports team after the amble hunter. Check out the jersey yourself at http://www.goseawolves.com.
And it's divine intervention to even give this team a prayer in the WCHA.
reply Submitted by Anonymous on Fri, 12/14/2007 - 06:58.