Re: JPIII: unmitigated rubbish

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/23/01 1:15:40 PM EST, jbaker1@citlink.net writes:

<< I really don't see the point of nitpicking it to death, the audience
really does not care (nor will they ever care) about a 'spinosaur with
lacrimal horns and overly long forelimbs', I think it's safe to say that they
don't make these movies for Paleontologists ;)

 Maybe you dont like the story (or lack thereof), I'm sorry but I think it is
so silly to worry about scientific accuracy in a Hollywood movie. How can you
ever enjoy any movie while sweating all the details? >>

Here's the problem: The general audience, as you state, doesn't care whether
the Spinosaurus has lacrimal horns or not. So >why not< do it the >right< way
(if we know the right way)? Why go out of one's way to do it >wrong<, if the
audience doesn't care one way or the other? Just so that nitpickers will have
something to talk about after the picture? It takes no more effort to do it
right than to do it wrong.

(Incidentally, Spinosaurus >probably< didn't have larcimal horns, because its
relatives with known skulls didn't, but we don't have an actual Spinosaurus
skull to support this.)