Talk:Cave bear

message: More information from this article https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/08/160823083557.htm needs to be added.
GaryGMason (talk) 23:01, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: The Vegan Cave Bear

message: that picture resembles a human skeleton so i think that ancient myths of giants could come from people discovering these fossils and thinking that they were human fossils. is there any fact in this thought or am i wrong?
:Maybe, maybe not. But its sure that this might be more suited to a website which discusses the origins of Myths and Legends. Wikipedia is not a theory central, as you probably know and if you wish to add that in the article, find reference. And no, I dont think there is any proof. Thank you, anonymous. Arctic-Editor 21:24, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure what the evidence is for heights of early humans, but even 2000 years ago, people were shorter. A typical human today could have seemed like a giant, and some human populations are shorter than average. 2601:600:8500:B2D9:2489:CE72:F12C:A568 (talk) 00:25, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It may look like a human skeleton to someone who has never seen the skeleton of a bear before. And ancient people probably weren't as detached from nature as we are today, so I doubt they would confuse the two. FunkMonk (talk) 18:10, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: Fossils are preserved better in caves, so assuming that an animal whose fossils were found in a cave lived mostly in caves is inaccurate. In 1,000 years the brown or black bear might have fossils only in caves.
Modern scientists know this. If the prevailing theory is still that cave bears actually did live mostly in caves, it must be because scientists found other evidence indicating this.
--Adrianne Mayor has a great book which deals about fossil bones inspiring legends of giants.--70.59.155.91 23:19, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Realism in article 

message: Was this about as massive as the brown bear or more lean like Arctodus?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.70.20.113 (talk) 20:16, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Build? 

message: *A British television program theorized that the cave bear went extinct because during the most intense part of the last Ice Age they could not find enough food to fatten enough for hibernation, causing many deaths during hibernation, which is why so many of their skeletons were found in caves. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:36, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: But there were lots of ice ages, weren't there? If they could live to adulthood, food couldn't have been that scarce during previous years. Is it possible that humans commonly killed animals in caves using fire? Do normal fires create significant amounts of carbon monoxide? 2601:600:8500:B2D9:2489:CE72:F12C:A568 (talk) 00:23, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extinction 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Cave bear. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/w/x/wxk116/cavebears/
*Added  tag to https://nts1.cgu.cz/bulletin/contents/2006/vol81no4/237_diedrich.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100331031106/http://www.fns.uniba.sk:80/fileadmin/kalendar/2009/symposium/Abstract_book.pdf to http://www.fns.uniba.sk/fileadmin/kalendar/2009/symposium/Abstract_book.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:44, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Cave bear. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120402115230/http://worldmuseumofman.org/cavebear.php to http://worldmuseumofman.org/cavebear.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:49, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: If the cave bear went extinct 24,000 years ago and the Les Combarelles cave was occupied only between 11,000-13,000 years ago, then the depiction was not that of a cave bear and should be removed. William Harris (talk) 06:44, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: this, this, and this say the Les Combarelles bear is U. spelaeus. This says "It has been claimed previously by a number of authors that cave bear survived in some areas well beyond the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), i.e. into the Late glacial and Holocene (Kurte´n 1958, 1976; Musil 1981). In particular, records of cave bear remains in association with Magdalenian industries in the Swabian Alb and Westphalia (Germany), the Jura mountains (Switzerland), Slovenia, and in the uppermost Pleistocene levels at Pod hradem Cave in the Czech Republic (Koby 1944; Musil 1965; Kurte´n 1976; Pohar 1994) implied survival until at least c. 12 000–15 000 14C yr BP. However, as shown in the present article, these records have not so far been corroborated by direct radiometric dating of U. spelaeus material. This discrepancy can most probably be attributed to uncertainties in the stratigraphic provenance of many cave bear remains, especially uncertainties of association of faunal and archaeological material and misidentifications (confusion with brown bear Ursus arctos)."   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  13:29, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Les Combarelles cave depiction? 

message: It says:
"Of cave bear skeletons in museums, 90% are male due to a misconception that the female skeletons were merely "dwarfs"."
Surely a "misconception" can't cause a change in sex?
I propose to change this to "90% were classified male". Or possibly delete the claim entirely; there's a citation for the section, but it's to a book I don't have access to, and I don't know if it supports this apparently-mangled claim.
MrDemeanour (talk) 13:43, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description