Wasn't this thread closed already today?

That's interesting!
but I don't think those wings will help them lift their weight.

Yes, yes it was.

ShingoEX Wrote: Wasn't this thread closed already today?

Yeah, it was closed earlier, but I spoke with the other mods for a second opinion, and they said it technically wasn't spam. Hence, I gave the author permission to re-create the thread.

Honest mistake.

Hmm, and it was even started by the same person that started the other thread that was closed....

Obviously didn't learn the first time!

Thanks TemperaryUserName

Hey cool! I LOVE freakey demon things. My cousin/ex-roomate was trying to breed crabbits(Were mentioned in the article).



^_^^_^InuYasha^_^^_^

TemperaryUserName Wrote: Yeah, it was closed earlier, but I spoke with the other mods for a second opinion, and they said it technically wasn't spam. Hence, I gave the author permission to re-create the thread. Honest mistake.

Bumpy start as a mod, eh Tampon? Don't worry I'll create some real spam threads soon and smooth ya out.

*smacks Temp*

Just because.



This isn't farfetched by a long shot. Sure, its pretty obviously the cats can't fly, but having "wings" doesn't seem too unlikely. The photos are real, as the wing-like protrusions aren't feathers at all, but hard tufts of fur. This little fella I like best:



I'm actually very interested in this stuff at the moment, and what really caught my attention was the cabbit. There have been many reports like this throughout the years, and it hasn't been proven false. However, I think it comes from a genetic deformity that makes it seems like the cat can hop like a rabbit. If you pick up a cat and a bunny, put them side by side, you can tell they have very similar leg structures:



Kangaroo cats (or Squittens) have similar deformities. By no means is the cat in extreme pain, as they can move just fine. No, they can't hop, as its not a hybrid. Just a genetic mutation:



At the moment I'm looking at mutations in larger cats, and I might respond with something to that as well.

theres obvisously a pidgeon behind the cat


jeez, roswell and now this, damn you government, damn you!!!

Wanderer, have you been stealing??

Cats can't grow wings, cats cannot mate outside their species(just like we can't either). You show me a clear pic of a cat with wings, and I'll show you one of the Olsen twins with pasties on their breasts.

Goddamnit. That pisses me off. Let me upload the pics elswhere. They were all from the main site too.

Also, I've shown you a picture and the topic creator has shown you a picture of a cat with wings. I also even explained why they aren't truly wings.

There ARE cats with wings. They get them the same way humans get tails and extra fingers. It's a deformity.

PS - Don't try to show us Seemaya's fake that he made months and months ago. It was funny when he originally posted it at F@$2's. It's old and boring now. His new fake is better, anyway.

skeletonofsociety Wrote: Wanderer, have you been stealing?? Cats can't grow wings, cats cannot mate outside their species(just like we can't either). You show me a clear pic of a cat with wings, and I'll show you one of the Olsen twins with pasties on their breasts.

Hyuga Wrote: There ARE cats with wings. They get them the same way humans get tails and extra fingers. It's a deformity. PS - Don't try to show us Seemaya's fake that he made months and months ago. It was funny when he originally posted it at F@$2's. It's old and boring now. His new fake is better, anyway. skeletonofsociety Wrote: Wanderer, have you been stealing?? Cats can't grow wings, cats cannot mate outside their species(just like we can't either). You show me a clear pic of a cat with wings, and I'll show you one of the Olsen twins with pasties on their breasts.

It isn't as old as the first pic of the cat with wings, hell that one's been around for a couple of years. Secondly, I'm not debating a deformity, just the authenticity of the first pic.

Um... Then why did you say that cats can't grow wings if you're not "debating a deformity"? Why did you even mention interspecies mating if you knew of the deformity in the first place?
Seems like a roundabout way to get to your point, which you may have never mentioned if I hadn't have said anything.

By wings, I was refering to "those things with feathers". Never once did I denounce a possiblity of overgrown sholderblades covered in fur(or something similar to that nature). By using the term wings it implies feathers, with a possiblity of flight (not all animals with wings fly, but we all know this by now). In my OPINION if there arn't feathers, and they don't fly, then they arn't wings...and no, I probably wouldn't have given my complete opinion if you hadn't posted, I was going to leave it at that.

Now I know we refer to other animal's "wings" but they arn't wing either (ex. buffalo wings). And you can't really say penguins have wings either, they're more like flaps.

Ok. I see.

skeletonofsociety Wrote: By wings, I was refering to "those things with feathers". Never once did I denounce a possiblity of overgrown sholderblades covered in fur(or something similar to that nature). By using the term wings it implies feathers, with a possiblity of flight (not all animals with wings fly, but we all know this by now). In my OPINION if there arn't feathers, and they don't fly, then they arn't wings...and no, I probably wouldn't have given my complete opinion if you hadn't posted, I was going to leave it at that. Now I know we refer to other animal's "wings" but they arn't wing either (ex. buffalo wings). And you can't really say penguins have wings either, they're more like flaps.

What about bats? They have wings (you can check an encyclopedia if you need), and they don't have feathers, they have skin and hair.

-Shoe

Oh yeah. Booya.

shoeunited Wrote: skeletonofsociety Wrote: By wings, I was refering to "those things with feathers". Never once did I denounce a possiblity of overgrown sholderblades covered in fur(or something similar to that nature). By using the term wings it implies feathers, with a possiblity of flight (not all animals with wings fly, but we all know this by now). In my OPINION if there arn't feathers, and they don't fly, then they arn't wings...and no, I probably wouldn't have given my complete opinion if you hadn't posted, I was going to leave it at that. Now I know we refer to other animal's "wings" but they arn't wing either (ex. buffalo wings). And you can't really say penguins have wings either, they're more like flaps. What about bats? They have wings (you can check an encyclopedia if you need), and they don't have feathers, they have skin and hair. -Shoe

shoeunited Wrote: skeletonofsociety Wrote: By wings, I was refering to "those things with feathers". Never once did I denounce a possiblity of overgrown sholderblades covered in fur(or something similar to that nature). By using the term wings it implies feathers, with a possiblity of flight (not all animals with wings fly, but we all know this by now). In my OPINION if there arn't feathers, and they don't fly, then they arn't wings...and no, I probably wouldn't have given my complete opinion if you hadn't posted, I was going to leave it at that. Now I know we refer to other animal's "wings" but they arn't wing either (ex. buffalo wings). And you can't really say penguins have wings either, they're more like flaps. What about bats? They have wings (you can check an encyclopedia if you need), and they don't have feathers, they have skin and hair. -Shoe

And most known insects in this world?
EDIT: Fuck it, i did'nt read SOS's post carefully enough. I did'nt say anything

shoeunited Wrote: skeletonofsociety Wrote: By wings, I was refering to "those things with feathers". Never once did I denounce a possiblity of overgrown sholderblades covered in fur(or something similar to that nature). By using the term wings it implies feathers, with a possiblity of flight (not all animals with wings fly, but we all know this by now). In my OPINION if there arn't feathers, and they don't fly, then they arn't wings...and no, I probably wouldn't have given my complete opinion if you hadn't posted, I was going to leave it at that. Now I know we refer to other animal's "wings" but they arn't wing either (ex. buffalo wings). And you can't really say penguins have wings either, they're more like flaps. What about bats? They have wings (you can check an encyclopedia if you need), and they don't have feathers, they have skin and hair. -Shoe

They don't have feathers, yes. But they can fly. Read what what I wrote more closly. What I wrote doesn't overlook bats.

Here are two cross breed animals I will find more better ones another time

The Wolphin is the result of
a Whale and a Dolphin.

The Zebroid is the result of breeding
a female Horse and a male Zebra.

Hyuga Wrote: Oh yeah. Booya. shoeunited Wrote: skeletonofsociety Wrote: By wings, I was refering to "those things with feathers". Never once did I denounce a possiblity of overgrown sholderblades covered in fur(or something similar to that nature). By using the term wings it implies feathers, with a possiblity of flight (not all animals with wings fly, but we all know this by now). In my OPINION if there arn't feathers, and they don't fly, then they arn't wings...and no, I probably wouldn't have given my complete opinion if you hadn't posted, I was going to leave it at that. Now I know we refer to other animal's "wings" but they arn't wing either (ex. buffalo wings). And you can't really say penguins have wings either, they're more like flaps. What about bats? They have wings (you can check an encyclopedia if you need), and they don't have feathers, they have skin and hair. -Shoe

SheUntied was the one who mentioned the bats.

Not you.

Thus, YOU can't say booya.

Punish yourself by trying to make sense of what Marcel writes.