|
-----Original
Message----- While of
course I agree with most of the complaints about the scientific faux pas of
JP3, I think it has become pretty clear even from the movie's own disclaimer
that the animals on Isla Sorna are less dinosaurs than they are
"genetically engineered amusement park monsters." Even so, they are
being called by dinosaur names... A lot of the criticisms levelled at the
dinosaurs depicted in JP3 remind me of the initial wave of complaints about the
pseudo-raptors and the frilled _Dilophosaurus_
in the original movie. I remember mentioning those inconsistencies to a friend,
and he came back with an insightful observation; just because no evidence has
been found to prove that _Dilophosaurus_
had a neck frill doesn't necessarily mean that it or a similar species
absolutely didn't have one. Not to say
your friend is wrong, but he is. I’ve heard these kind of arguments ever since
JP. So what evidence really is there that _Dilophosaurus_ was without a frill or the
ability to spit venomous goo? Other than the lack of evidence for it, I mean?
Is it right for books to say that JP was actually flat-out wrong in depicting _Dilophosaurus_ with a frill and spitting? Absolutely.
It’s a movie plot, that’s all. Tracy L. Ford P. O. Box 1171 Poway Ca 92074 |