Scientifically speaking, who would win in a fight in the following

>>8720992
>Silverback
>Lion

The proof is obvious and left as an exercise for the reader.

A kodiak bear is fucking huge, it would easily win a fight against a silverback or a lion

UNLESS the fight lasts longer than 28 years, the average life expectancy of kodiaks

Gorillas eat fruit. They're not predators, aren't used to fighting, and are half the size

>>8721453
Except a silverback's task is to defend the pack (or whatever a group of gorillas is called), and they are known to fight to death against leopards. It will fight under right circumstances but it will lose agianst a bear

>>8720992
Just because you put "scientifically speaking" in your thread doesn't mean it's science related. Anyway, I want to know the answer to this question as well.

File: img_1137.jpg (437KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

437KB, 1280x853px

>brainlets on /sci/ unironically think this could take a silverback gorilla

lmao kill your're are selfs

a bear would fucking wreck a gorilla.

File: 4673-327x217-African_baby.jpg (10KB, 327x217px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 327x217px

>>8722640
>implying

>>8721077
>>8721453
>>8722645
What the fuck is wrong with you brainlets? It's called gorilla warfare for a fucking reason.

File: Silverback.jpg (136KB, 1100x619px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 1100x619px

>>8722646
>silverback
A silverback is a fully grown male though

>>8722651
ever heard of the right to bear arms? yeah, I thought not brainlet

Scientifically speaking, we don't stage animal
fights, because the experimental data is of
little utility. We already know the base nature of
human savagery in staging such fights.