Student break into Houston Zoo exhibits during field trip

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Vasa Croe




, because the fence I see is about waist high and the jaguar is higher than the fence on the table....

The "fence you see" is only visible because of the contrasting background.

It extends all the way up, even beyond the "8 foot" height you mention and would be attached to a ceiling piece because Jaguars can easily get over an 8 foot chainlink fence.

The camera's depth of focus completely obscures the top half of the fence.

If you can't understand photography at least you can use common sense.

If the fence was waist high, what was stopping the Jaguar from mauling the Juvie?

Please DENY ignorance!

Contrasting background? So the camera magically does NOT obscure the bottom half up to where you can see the twists at the top of the fence WHERE IT ENDS, but you are claiming it DOES obscure the top half somehow?

I understand photography very well, and what you are saying is absolute rubbish. The kids hand is either ON the cats back foot or very close. There is NO obscuring of a fence.

Please DENY ignorance.....your trolling of multiple threads on this site is obvious and old news.

No, you don't have a clue about depth of field.

I'll take one last stab at 'common sense'.

If the fence is waist high and the kid is touching the Jaguar's foot, why isn't this story about him being mauled?

As far as the kid being able to touch it without being mauled...I would say dumb luck and likely the jaguar had just been fed and was resting on a table so it wasn't hungry....they don't tend to attack just for fun.

LOL

So much for common sense!

"They don't tend to attack just for fun."

It was just restin'

www.youtube.com...

Hahaha!!
Thanks Croe, you made my day.

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Vasa Croe




, because the fence I see is about waist high and the jaguar is higher than the fence on the table....

The "fence you see" is only visible because of the contrasting background.

It extends all the way up, even beyond the "8 foot" height you mention and would be attached to a ceiling piece because Jaguars can easily get over an 8 foot chainlink fence.

The camera's depth of focus completely obscures the top half of the fence.

If you can't understand photography at least you can use common sense.

If the fence was waist high, what was stopping the Jaguar from mauling the Juvie?

Please DENY ignorance!

Contrasting background? So the camera magically does NOT obscure the bottom half up to where you can see the twists at the top of the fence WHERE IT ENDS, but you are claiming it DOES obscure the top half somehow?

I understand photography very well, and what you are saying is absolute rubbish. The kids hand is either ON the cats back foot or very close. There is NO obscuring of a fence.

Please DENY ignorance.....your trolling of multiple threads on this site is obvious and old news.

No, you don't have a clue about depth of field.

I'll take one last stab at 'common sense'.

If the fence is waist high and the kid is touching the Jaguar's foot, why isn't this story about him being mauled?

As far as the kid being able to touch it without being mauled...I would say dumb luck and likely the jaguar had just been fed and was resting on a table so it wasn't hungry....they don't tend to attack just for fun.

LOL

So much for common sense!

"They don't tend to attack just for fun."

Hahaha!!!

Thanks Croe, you made my day.

Your ignorance and insults are easily seen through and show that you actually know nothing of what you speak. Try researching Big Cats and when/why they attack. Even in captivity the attacks are rare and typically occur when one is hungry, or has young ones around or is cornered.

Troll away!

It was prolly just pining for the fjords.

I would never insult you Croe.

No need.

originally posted by: Psynic
Bear in mind, before you publicly flog the entire class, that the actual evidence begins and ends with one fuzzy picture.

Everything else here has been hearsay and fabrications.

There seems to be enough evidence from the images and the tweets sent by other students that these things happened. If it turns out that this was all somehow fabricated then of course there shouldn't be any inappropriate punishment.

It seems though, from what is known, that this did happen, and therefore these students deserve to be punished. That, in my opinion, should include public shaming - notice I did not suggest public flogging, no matter how much you might wish I had.

originally posted by: Rocker2013

originally posted by: Psynic
Bear in mind, before you publicly flog the entire class, that the actual evidence begins and ends with one fuzzy picture.

Everything else here has been hearsay and fabrications.

the images and the tweets

Image, singular.

Not "Images".

That leaves "tweets"

You gonna expel these kids based on other kids "tweets"?

And for being "inside a Jaguar cage" that they weren't inside of?

Come on.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

I like you.

But, you need to view a larger, sharper picture of that fence.

The fence does not stop at the top of the box.

Think how dangerous that situation would be for the animal.

originally posted by: Rocker2013

originally posted by: Psynic
Bear in mind, before you publicly flog the entire class, that the actual evidence begins and ends with one fuzzy picture.

Everything else here has been hearsay and fabrications.

There seems to be enough evidence from the images and the tweets sent by other students that these things happened. If it turns out that this was all somehow fabricated then of course there shouldn't be any inappropriate punishment.

It seems though, from what is known, that this did happen, and therefore these students deserve to be punished. That, in my opinion, should include public shaming - notice I did not suggest public flogging, no matter how much you might wish I had.

Obviously it DID happen, otherwise the principal would NOT publicly apologize to the zoo!

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Anyafaj

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: SallieSunshine
Well, Texas is a big rodeo state where adults set the poor example of tormenting and harassing animals in a public arena. It is no wonder these kids thought the zoo animals were fair game.

Sallie

a reply to: Anyafaj

So, please point out the 8 foot fence separating the kid from the jaguar in this instance, because the fence I see is about waist high and the jaguar is higher than the fence on the table....

You're not looking carefully. You see only the short vertical fence. There's also a very tall angled green fence. Look for the green fence post. The photo was an optical illusion.

originally posted by: Anyafaj

originally posted by: Rocker2013

originally posted by: Psynic

Obviously it DID happen, otherwise the principal would NOT publicly apologize to the zoo!

First, look at the sources of the news story: all third rate. Secondly, re-read the alleged letter from the principal. Did it say anything about a student inside the leopard cage? No. The photo is an optical illusion. Students may have misbehaved at the zoo but that does not mean someone was inside a cage with a leopard. Use common sense.

edit on 11-3-2015 by Tangerine because: not posting correctly

a reply to: Anyafaj

Apply common sense. Nowhere in the principal's letter (if there was such a letter) does it say a student was inside a cage with a leopard. You need to follow other links to better images of the photo in question. It produced an optical illusion and the person was not inside the cage. Had s/he been, severe injury would have resulted. Have you never been a teenager? Had a photo taken at the zoo created the optical illusion that you were inside a cage almost touching a leopard, you likely would have been quite happy to maintain that illusion to gain attention.

Why oh why is common sense in such short supply? Why didn't the OP do a little research before posting this story? Why did the readers simply assume that this was a legitimate story? How easy it is to con people.

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I like you.

But, you need to view a larger, sharper picture of that fence.

The fence does not stop at the top of the box.

Think how dangerous that situation would be for the animal.

^not to mention the kid, huh?


Oh I love it! LOL!

Tell her about your photography skills!

I think the two of you should plan a trip to the zoo!



Bring your cameras!

Just try to remember the difference between "in the jaguars cage" and "not in the jaguars cage".

Cheers!

originally posted by: Tangerine
a reply to: Anyafaj

Apply common sense. Nowhere in the principal's letter (if there was such a letter) does it say a student was inside a cage with a leopard. You need to follow other links to better images of the photo in question. It produced an optical illusion and the person was not inside the cage. Had s/he been, severe injury would have resulted. Have you never been a teenager? Had a photo taken at the zoo created the optical illusion that you were inside a cage almost touching a leopard, you likely would have been quite happy to maintain that illusion to gain attention.

Why oh why is common sense in such short supply? Why didn't the OP do a little research before posting this story? Why did the readers simply assume that this was a legitimate story? How easy it is to con people.

Don't question providence!

This is the best laugh I've had all day!

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I like you.

But, you need to view a larger, sharper picture of that fence.

The fence does not stop at the top of the box.

Think how dangerous that situation would be for the animal.

^not to mention the kid, huh?


Oh I love it! LOL!

Tell her about your photography skills!

I think the two of you should plan a trip to the zoo!

Bring your cameras!

Just try to remember the difference between "in the jaguars cage" and "not in the jaguars cage".

Cheers!

I did work as a graphic artist,

but carrying a camera around annoys the hell out of me.

I still say you're nit-picking.

So, you're all excited about "IN THE CAGE".

The headline says this:

Houston Zoo is investigating after image of student inside jaguar PIT attempting to pet animal during field trip surfaced on Twitter Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Further down it talks about Twitter messages:

Several users on Twitter reportedly claimed the image of the student from the field trip last Friday in the jaguar cage . . . Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

originally posted by: Annee
So, you're all excited about "IN THE CAGE".

The headline says this:

Houston Zoo is investigating after image of student inside jaguar PIT attempting to pet animal during field trip surfaced on Twitter Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Further down it talks about Twitter messages:

Several users on Twitter reportedly claimed the image of the student from the field trip last Friday in the jaguar cage . . . Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Your source is a freaking tabloid.

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Annee
So, you're all excited about "IN THE CAGE".

The headline says this:

Houston Zoo is investigating after image of student inside jaguar PIT attempting to pet animal during field trip surfaced on Twitter Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Further down it talks about Twitter messages:

Several users on Twitter reportedly claimed the image of the student from the field trip last Friday in the jaguar cage . . . Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Your source is a freaking tabloid.

It's the OP LINK. Not my choice.

The fuss is about "in the cage". The headline clearly says "in the PIT".

Here it is from a local Houston site --- which says:

According to zoo officials, security found out about the allegations on Friday, after a photo of a student attempting to touch a jaguar in the animal's cage surfaced on Twitter.

It does not say the student is in the cage. It says the animal is in the cage.

www.click2houston.com...

Same local Houston news site seems to be the origin of this, dated March 6: www.click2houston.com...

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Annee
So, you're all excited about "IN THE CAGE".

The headline says this:

Houston Zoo is investigating after image of student inside jaguar PIT attempting to pet animal during field trip surfaced on Twitter Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Further down it talks about Twitter messages:

Several users on Twitter reportedly claimed the image of the student from the field trip last Friday in the jaguar cage . . . Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Your source is a freaking tabloid.

It's the OP LINK. Not my choice.

The fuss is about "in the cage". The headline clearly says "in the PIT".

Here it is from a local Houston site --- which says:

According to zoo officials, security found out about the allegations on Friday, after a photo of a student attempting to touch a jaguar in the animal's cage surfaced on Twitter.

It does not say the student is in the cage. It says the animal is in the cage.

www.click2houston.com...

You find that credible? Why?

a reply to: Anyafaj

No it doesn't. It says the person who posted the photo on the internet makes that claim. It's frightening that people are so careless in decoding that information they're given.

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Annee
So, you're all excited about "IN THE CAGE".

The headline says this:

Houston Zoo is investigating after image of student inside jaguar PIT attempting to pet animal during field trip surfaced on Twitter Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Further down it talks about Twitter messages:

Several users on Twitter reportedly claimed the image of the student from the field trip last Friday in the jaguar cage . . . Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Your source is a freaking tabloid.

It's the OP LINK. Not my choice.

The fuss is about "in the cage". The headline clearly says "in the PIT".

Here it is from a local Houston site --- which says:

According to zoo officials, security found out about the allegations on Friday, after a photo of a student attempting to touch a jaguar in the animal's cage surfaced on Twitter.

It does not say the student is in the cage. It says the animal is in the cage.

www.click2houston.com...

You find that credible? Why?

Seriously????

The OP article was posted March 10. The original article from the local Houston news was posted. March 6.

At this point there is allegations and an investigation. Being that they are minors we'll probably not know the outcome.

You left out one important component: extremely gullible people.