Creation is an act of sheer will. Next time it will be flawless...(est. 2016)
 
Jurassic Mainframe NewsHomeOur Discord ServerLatest imagesJurassic-PediaSearchRegisterLog in

Search found 69 matches for 1

AuthorMessage
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: The Saurian Dakotaraptor could be better
JD-man

Replies: 1
Views: 1392

Search in: The Museum   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: The Saurian Dakotaraptor could be better    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeMon Oct 03, 2022 2:55 pm
I originally posted the following at deviantART ( https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-Saurian-Dakotaraptor-follow-up-931708639 ).

Quote :
This journal entry is a follow-up to "SD: The Saurian Dakotaraptor could be better" ( https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-The-Saurian-Dakotaraptor-could-be-better-707516300 ). I hope that at least some of you will get something out of it.

Follow-up #1) On 8/24/17, I messaged Dinosaurs In The Wild on Facebook: "What kind of parental care do these Dakotaraptor have ( http://people.eku.edu/ritchisong/parentalcare.html )? I'm guessing either subprecocial or semiprecocial, but wanna make sure. Many thanks in advance." On 12/1/17, DITW replied in a very informative way (See the DITW quote).

Follow-up #2) Based on what I've read, the brooding Deinonychus specimen (I.e. AMNH 3015) was probably an older female:
-Among living dinos, older/laying females have wider pelvic bones than males & younger/non-laying females (Lovebirds: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22generally+the+females+are+broader%22&biw=1440&bih=821&tbm=bks&ei=dYILYtCLIfTA0PEP5u-4UA&ved=0ahUKEwiQmpj7wYH2AhV0IDQIHeY3DgoQ4dUDCAk&uact=5&oq=%22generally+the+females+are+broader%22&gs_lcp=Cg1nd3Mtd2l6LWJvb2tzEAM6BQghEKsCOgcIIRAKEKsCOgQIIRAKUJcGWLcXYJMZaABwAHgAgAFKiAG0BJIBATmYAQCgAQHAAQE&sclient=gws-wiz-books ) (Pigeons: https://www.pigeons.biz/threads/can-someone-tell-me-if-this-female-pigeon-is-too-young-to-mate.66955/ ) (Guineafowl: https://thisnzlife.co.nz/five-reasons-add-guinea-fowl-flock/ ).
-According to Erickson et al. 2007 ( http://kristicurryrogers.weebly.com/uploads/9/2/1/7/92179666/erickson_et_al_2007.pdf ), AMNH 3015 was 13-14 years old when it died ("Life spans for small to midsized dinosaurs were 7-15 years": https://books.google.com/books?id=CakwDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA184&dq=%22Life+spans+for+small+to+midsized%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiNgb_OxoH2AhUhCTQIHV6JAXYQ6AF6BAgCEAI#v=onepage&q=%22Life%20spans%20for%20small%20to%20midsized%22&f=false ) & had been reproductively active for many years.
-According to Grellet-Tinner & Makovicky 2006 ( https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237169372_A_possible_egg_of_the_dromaeosaur_Deinonychus_antirrhopus_Phylogenetic_and_biological_implications ), AMNH 3015's pelvic canal diameter "compares well with" its egg diameter, which is what we'd expect for an older female (as opposed to a male or younger female).

Follow-up #3) Bonadonna illustrated "a mother caring for her brood" based on AMNH 3015. As you may remember, 1 of his illustrations is on the cover of "National Geographic Magazine (October, 2020) Reimagining Dinosaurs" ( https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-My-favorite-aspects-of-Camp-Cretaceous-882741250 ). The other is in the interior of said magazine ( https://twitter.com/jasontreat/status/1305871995494596608 ). I especially love said illustrations for showing the family life of my favorite dino from interesting perspectives (I.e. Directly above & inside the nest, respectively) in addition to the realistic colors, textures, lighting, etc.

Quoting DITW (I added the brackets for clarification): "Hi Herman, we've checked with our resident paleontologist [Darren Naish] who says:
We have found that the specific grades of parental care used for modern birds do not translate especially well to some of the non-bird dinosaurs we've been studying. Dakoraptor babies would be classed as 'subprecocial' within avian terminology, since they initially stay within the nest and are fed by the parents, even though they are able to leave it. However, they are actually able to leave the nest almost immediately and forage for themselves, making them more toward the 'superprecocial' part of the scale if they were birds. Our working hypothesis is that dromaeosaurids (and maybe some other Mesozoic theropods too) have evolved a brief bout of post-hatching parental care for reasons related to the intense predation of juveniles that happens in some faunal assemblage. In other words, while the babies have the anatomy and biology that might allow them to leave the nest and live independent lives almost immediately, a behavioural specialisation has evolved that keeps them in - or, at least, next to - the nest for their first few weeks."
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: Top 4 children's natural histories of dinos
JD-man

Replies: 0
Views: 102

Search in: The Museum   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: Top 4 children's natural histories of dinos    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeWed Aug 03, 2022 5:16 pm
This post[...which was originally posted at deviantART: https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-Top-4-children-s-natural-histories-of-dinos-924726008 ]is the sequel to "Top 4 natural histories of dinos" ( https://jurassicmainframe.forumotion.com/t1532-top-4-natural-histories-of-dinos ). It's nothing formal, just a list of what I (as a non-expert dino fan) think are the best children's NHDs & why. Even still, I hope that at least some of you will get something out of it.

Cheers,
Herman Diaz

4) Tie btwn Sattler's "Dinosaurs of North America" (which I reviewed: https://www.amazon.com/review/R3IRL42USNECN7/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ) & Wallace's "Familiar Dinosaurs" (which I reviewed: https://www.amazon.com/review/R2YZX033VMS8SY/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): I can't decide which of these 2 books is better. They're both great for reasons that remind me of Stout's "The New Dinosaurs"/"The Dinosaurs: A Fantastic New View of a Lost Era":
-Like Stout's book, Sattler's is a 1981 book that extended its relevancy w/supplementary info. One could argue that said info + the larger & more consistently-good paleoart make it a better natural history for kids.
-Like Stout's book, Wallace's has a day-in-the-life format. One could argue that said format + the more colorful & naturalistic paleoart make it a better natural history for kids.

3) Lessem's "Dinosaur Worlds" (which I reviewed: https://www.amazon.com/review/R1SLNBX289TA4K/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): My review sums up most of the reasons why this book is 1 of the best/most underrated children's NHDs. Put another way, to paraphrase Rowdy Roddy Piper ( https://www.pinterest.com/pin/819725569646534737/ ), this book "was [WWD] before [WWD] was cool." It's also worth mentioning that this book is backed by the Dinosaur Society ( http://web.archive.org/web/19980508204458/http://www.dinosociety.org/ ).

2) Howard's "Dinosaur Empire! (Earth Before Us #1): Journey through the Mesozoic Era" (which I reviewed: https://www.amazon.com/review/R17ZWNPWDUKZWI/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): I went back-&-forth on whether this book should be tied w/Lessem's (which is more in-depth). In the end, I decided that this book is slightly better for 2 main reasons: 1) This book is MUCH more up-to-date; 2) If Lessem's book is basically a better version of WWD, then this book is basically a better version of WWD + a better version of Cole's "The Magic School Bus in the Time of the Dinosaurs"; In reference to Cole's book, my review sums up why; In reference to WWD, the reviews of Dino Dad ( https://dinodadreviews.com/2019/02/25/dinosaur-empire-earth-before-us-1/ ) & Witton ( https://markwitton-com.blogspot.com/2019/12/interview-with-abby-howard-author-and.html ) sum up why.

1) Tie btwn Bakker's "The Big Golden Book of Dinosaurs" (which I reviewed: https://www.amazon.com/review/R2INIHTO7ANTSM/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ) & Chuang/Yang's "Age Of Dinosaurs" (which I reviewed: https://www.amazon.com/review/R1JA1ASNYXD7W6/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): Before reading Chuang/Yang's book, Bakker's was the obvious #1 contender for reasons discussed in my review + the inclusion of Random House websites for supplementary info. However, I've since realized that the former does almost everything the latter does, but bigger & more beautiful. In fact, for reasons discussed in my review, Chuang/Yang's book is basically a more beautiful version of Bakker's + a more beautiful version of Stout's.

Honorable Mention) Gaffney's "Dinosaurs: A Fully Illustrated, Authoritative and Easy-to-Use Guide" (which I reviewed: https://www.amazon.com/review/R2JTBGQ68Z5STT/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): Similarly to Norell's "The World of Dinosaurs: An Illustrated Tour", I do think that this book is 1 of the best children's NHDs, but I'm not sure where it should be listed relative to the other books. My review sums up why.
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: CAMP CRETACEOUS ANIMATED SERIES CONFIRMED ON NETFLIX!
JD-man

Replies: 76
Views: 7508

Search in: TV Universe   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: CAMP CRETACEOUS ANIMATED SERIES CONFIRMED ON NETFLIX!    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeWed Jul 20, 2022 5:51 am
Just finished rewatching S4 & wanted to share more of my thoughts before S5:

This scene is sorta Deus ex Machina-y, but awesome nonetheless: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bTOhkh2PPw

The Bumpy scene reminds me of "Jurassic Bark": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK3PWHxoT_E

Yaz's character development is the highlight of S4. I especially like 1) her gay panic look when being complimented by Sammy in ep1 (0:25: https://it-fits-i-ships.tumblr.com/post/672606756064690176/combing-through-every-single-episode-of-jurassic ), 2) her eyebrow raises throughout ( https://tenor.com/view/jurassic-world-camp-cretaceous-season-jwcc-yaz-yazmina-camp-cretaceous-gif-24085442 ), & 3) her confident head shake when being complimented by Sammy in ep11 ( https://campbumpy.tumblr.com/post/670306673897963520/even-brooklynn-knows-that-yaz-at-sammy-like-each ), which shows how far she's come since ep1.

We all know that Kash is gonna get his comeuppance eventually. What I'm wondering is how. I'm thinking either 1) via Velociraptor b/c he antagonized them w/invisible fences & golf balls, or 2) via Spinosaurus b/c he put it in the desert biome & told Darius to chip it.

Before S4, I was indifferent to ships w/the 4 single campers: For 1, any combination of Darius/Kenji/Brooklynn seemed equally plausible; For another, Ben seemed more in love w/Bumpy than anyone else. Now, I have to admit that Kenji/Brooklynn are surprisingly cute together. Also, I'm glad they didn't do a "Love Triangle" like some fans thought b/c that's 1 of my least favorite tropes. "Liar Revealed" is probably my #1 least favorite (which is partly why S1Ep6 is so hard for me to watch).

I figured the JP Dilophosaurus was defending its territory from (rather than hunting) Nedry, but it's good to have hard canon support for that in Ep11. Also, while I still prefer the real Dilophosaurus ( http://web.archive.org/web/20201216232515im_/https://static.scientificamerican.com/sciam/assets/Image/2020/saw0121Mars31_pan_and_zoom.jpg ), I like the idea of the JP/JW Dilophosaurus living in small territorial flocks that call to each other constantly.

No Sarcosuchus in S4. Maybe in S5, presumably in the Swamp Biome. If so, it'd be kind of amazing if CC's Sarcosuchus scenes had a musical reference to the Tic-Tock scenes in Disney's "Peter Pan": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOzlgbWEjzI

I've said this before, but it bears repeating:
-S4 is, at its core, pretty on-brand for a Michael Crichton-based story (I.e. All his stories are basically about humans trying & failing to use science to control what they don't understand; In fact, the original JP is basically Westworld w/GMO dinos instead of robot cowboys). I get not everyone likes seeing the JP/JW franchise progress in that way, but to claim it doesn't fit/make sense for the overarching story despite all the progressions that preceded it (E.g. JWFK's human-cloned Maisie & laser-controlled Indoraptor) is just plain nonsensical/inaccurate.
-On a related note, it's hard to take ppl seriously when they claim that S4 "jumped the shark"/"is a bridge too far", yet excuse JWFK's lava-/pyro-proof Owen & 4th-wall-breaking Indoraptor.
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!
JD-man

Replies: 85
Views: 9922

Search in: Dinosaur Jungles   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeSat Jul 02, 2022 5:09 am
My 89th review for this thread is a positive 1 for Chuang/Yang's Age of Dinosaurs. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Helpful" votes it can get because it's for a great book that deserves more attention. Many thanks in advance.

The most beautiful Natural History of Dinos ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R1JA1ASNYXD7W6/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): 5/5

As you may remember, I referred to Bakker's The Big Golden Book of Dinosaurs as "the best children's natural history of dinos" ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R2INIHTO7ANTSM/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ). However, that was before I read Chuang/Yang's Age of Dinosaurs (henceforth Age, originally published as THEM: Age Of Dinosaurs: https://www.amazon.com/PNSO-THEM-Dinosaurs-Book-Chuang/dp/7116094911 ). I can't say that either book is definitely better overall, but I can say that Age is probably the most beautiful NHD for kids or adults (hence the title of this review). In fact, in some ways, it's basically a more beautiful version of Bakker's book + a more beautiful version of Stout's The New Dinosaurs/The Dinosaurs: A Fantastic New View of a Lost Era ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R163RH76269WJS/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): Bakker's book because it has a safari vibe, a chronological format (I.e. It begins with a pre-Age Of Dinos story & ends with a post-Age Of Dinos story), & LOTS of technicolor dinos; Stout's book because of the reasons listed below.

1) Remember what I said about Stout's stories (See reason #1 in that review)? The same goes for Yang's, but even more so: For 1, Age tells even more stories representing even more species (105 representing 96); For another, Age's stories are even more varied, ranging from Aesop-esque fables to Wind in the Willows-esque vignettes & everything in between;* Some of my favorite examples of the former & latter are the Megalosaurus story ("The Megalosaurus would later learn that to be a good hunter, it had to abandon its arrogance and act more cautiously") & the Qianzhousaurus/Nankangia stories (which tell the same story from different POVs), respectively; For yet another, even more of Age's stories flow into each other; This is especially apparent in "The Lonesome Triassic Period" (I.e. Each story also represents a step in the dinos' gradual rise to dominance).

2) Remember what I said about Stout's illustrations (See reason #2 in that review)? The same goes for Chuang's, but even more so:
-I wouldn't describe Chuang's paleoart as "cartoonish" per se, but there IS a lot of stylistic variety. Don't take my word for it, though. Google "Them: Age of Dinosaurs" & see for yourself.
-Similar to how Stout's 1981 work is the most extreme product of the Dinosaur Renaissance, Chuang's Age work may be the most extreme product of the Dinosaur Enlightenment. In fact, to quote Conway (Google "Why Dinosaur Nerds are Mad at Jurassic World"), "when a new Jurassic Park film[...]comes along, we might hope that it will be like the first one. Up-to-date, challenging people’s old notions, and leaving a fresh impression of what the word ‘dinosaur’ actually means. Not perfect[...]but an authentically enthusiastic look at what we know about these strange animals." Put another way, I like to think that the Jurassic World dinos would look like Chuang's if JW's creators cared about dinos as real animals (as opposed to movie monsters).

*Just to clarify, there is some anthropomorphism, but no more than you'd expect in Disney's True-Life Adventures. The Anchiornis story is as anthropomorphic (& adorable) as Age gets: "The Anchiornis excitedly woke up its lover, and both headed toward the forest, which by now was covered in sunshine[...]"Slow down! I can't catch up with you!" its lover called gently. It turned around and smiled softly, "Take your time, I am running ahead of you to make sure that the path is safe."" That said, there is 1 story that stands out as weird. It's about a lonely Velociraptor that "never once laid eyes on its parents", but was determined to find them, yet there's no explanation of how it survived "for many years" without them. Speaking of weird, there's also several weird examples of misediting throughout Age (E.g. "Anchiornis belonged to the Troodontidae family of the Coeluridae group"; Should read: "Coelurosauria group").
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!
JD-man

Replies: 85
Views: 9922

Search in: Dinosaur Jungles   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeThu May 05, 2022 6:52 pm
My 88th review for this thread is a positive 1 for Brusatte's The Age of Dinosaurs. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Helpful" votes it can get because it's for a very good book that deserves more attention. Many thanks in advance.

Better in some ways, but not others ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R1OH8T8KHLCFEF/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): 4/5

As you may remember, Brusatte's The Rise and Fall of the Dinosaurs is good, but has some problems that keep it from being great ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R1H5PAIZYRT2B/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ). When I 1st heard about The Age of Dinosaurs (henceforth Age) being a junior edition of Rise, I was hopeful that Rise's problems wouldn't be Age's problems.* Age IS better in some ways, but not in others. In this review, I list those ways.

The following things make Age better in some ways:
-Age is MUCH easier & more visually appealing to read: For 1, it's broken up into more & shorter chapters; For another, there are more illustrations to support & break up the text; For yet another, Brusatte's long field stories are contained in breakout boxes (as opposed to the main text). I especially like the inclusion of said boxes. Said stories are very interesting & relevant, but not necessary to understanding the main text. In fact, they remind me of Epic Rap Battles of History when George R.R. Martin says to J.R.R. Tolkien, "You went too deep, Professor Tweed-pants! We don't need the backstory on every f***ing tree branch!"
-Brusatte seems to have learned from many of his text & writing mistakes in Rise. This is especially apparent in the facts that 1) more of Age's animal size comparisons work than do Rise's (3/4 vs. 2/3, respectively), & 2) there are only 2 equine size comparisons in Age, neither of which work (which is unfortunate, but also proves my point).

The following things keep Age from being better in other ways:
-Remember what I said about breakout boxes earlier? Unfortunately, Brusatte uses them not just for his long field stories, but also for some of the contextually-important parts of Rise (E.g. Rise's discussion of Allosaurus as "the Butcher of the Jurassic"). Furthermore, others are left out of Age entirely (E.g. There's no equivalent to Rise's discussion of the other Morrison Formation theropods in Age). Point is, Age might be a bit too easy to read, more like a Cliff Notes version of Rise than a junior edition.
-Remember The Lost World: Jurassic Park when Hammond is like, "Don't worry, I'm not making the same mistakes again", & Malcolm is like, "No, you're making all new ones"? Unfortunately, Brusatte does a little bit of both in Age: In reference to "making the same mistakes again", this is especially apparent when he repeats Austroposeidon's size overestimates (Quoting Molina-Pérez/Larramendi: "It is mistakenly believed to be the largest sauropod in Brazil");** In reference to "making all new ones", this is especially apparent when he incorrectly pluralizes "T. rex" as "T. rexes".

In short, I recommend reading Age in conjunction with either Howard's Dinosaur Empire! (Earth Before Us #1): Journey through the Mesozoic Era if you're closer to age 8 or Naish/Barrett's Dinosaurs: How They Lived and Evolved if you're closer to age 12. 1 more thing of note: This is more of a nit-pick, but Age's full title is very WTF. In fact, it reminds me of a Rifftrax joke about Dragon Wars: D-War ("I dunno boys[...]They're both amazing titles. I can't pick. Hey, let's use both! Go get some boba tea drinks!").

*This was mostly because Brusatte had acknowledged the wrongness of his claim that T. rex "had chimp-like intelligence" ( https://twitter.com/stevebrusatte/status/1220391171953954816 ).

**See Dinosaur Facts and Figures: The Sauropods and Other Sauropodomorphs. It's 1 of the books I use for fact-checking.
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!
JD-man

Replies: 85
Views: 9922

Search in: Dinosaur Jungles   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeThu Mar 03, 2022 2:24 am
My 85th review for this thread is a positive 1 for Gaffney's Dinosaurs: A Fully Illustrated, Authoritative and Easy-to-Use Guide. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Helpful" votes it can get because it's for a great book that deserves more attention. Many thanks in advance.

A REALLY great natural history ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R2JTBGQ68Z5STT/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): 5/5

Gaffney's Dinosaurs: A Fully Illustrated, Authoritative and Easy-to-Use Guide (henceforth DA) is great in ways that are hard for me to describe. In some ways, it reminds me of Howard's Dinosaur Empire! (Earth Before Us #1): Journey through the Mesozoic Era. In other ways, it reminds me of Norell's The World of Dinosaurs: An Illustrated Tour. In this review, I list those ways, besides the fact that all 3 books are natural histories of dinos.*

1) In terms of subject coverage & writing, DA reminds me of Howard's book. The Dino Dad Reviews quote sums up what I mean. Put another way: In reference to subject coverage, it covers "such subjects as evolution, locomotion, and feeding"; This is especially apparent in the introductory chapters (I.e. The 1st 41 pages, 8 of which show how the "characteristics of dinosaurs" evolved from those of earlier vertebrates), but also in the breaks between major dino groups; In reference to writing, remember what I said about Gaffney's DD work ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R1BP8LPRNRAT01/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 )?; The same goes for his DA work, but MUCH more so. This makes sense given DA's older kid audience. My only related gripe is that there are a few weird bits in the text (E.g. It's claimed that the Triassic began 250 MYA on page 12 & 225 MYA on page 13).

2) In terms of illustrations & organization, DA reminds me of Norell's book: For 1 (in reference to organization), it's a collection of 36 profiles with a phylogenetic format; Furthermore, it doesn't profile just any dinos, but "the best-known [dinos], those most likely to be encountered in North American museums"; For another (in reference to illustrations), remember what I said about Dawson's Ranger work (See reason #3: https://www.amazon.com/review/R94XM1O8E45DV/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 )?; The same goes for his DA work, but with MUCH more variety (I.e. Some of it IS very action-packed, but some of it is also very peaceful: https://sailorgojirarex1997.tumblr.com/tagged/John%20Dawson ); Furthermore, almost every profile includes both skeletal & life reconstructions.** This makes sense given DA's association with the American Museum of Natural History. My only related gripe is that some of Dawson's DA dinos have too many claws &/or a look that's derivative of Sibbick's "Normanpedia" dinos.

*Speaking of which, it's worth mentioning that 7 of the 13 popular dino books listed in the "More Information" chapter are natural histories of dinos, 4 of which I've reviewed​: 1) Waldrop/Loomis' Ranger Rick's Dinosaur Book; 2) Norman's When Dinosaurs Ruled the Earth ( https://www.amazon.com/review/RJ6H99FGIW6CC/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ); 3) Stout's The New Dinosaurs/The Dinosaurs: A Fantastic New View of a Lost Era ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R163RH76269WJS/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ); 4) Sattler's Dinosaurs of North America ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R3IRL42USNECN7/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ).

**Coincidentally, the Ornitholestes life reconstructions are my favorites in both books.

Quoting Dino Dad Reviews ( https://dinodadreviews.com/2019/02/25/dinosaur-empire-earth-before-us-1/ ):
Quote :
The pair stops off first at The Learning Center, located in a pleasant green field that reminds me of nothing so much as C.S. Lewis’s “Wood Between the Worlds” in The Magician’s Nephew. Ronnie and Ms. Lernin often return here throughout the book when they need a break from their adventures, and to explain some of the more complicated concepts necessary to put the things they see in their proper context. Howard manages to pace these interstitials just right so that they never feels like excessive info-dumps, and since they occur at natural breaks in the story, they don’t feel like they interrupt the action too much either...Howard does a fantastic job explaining various concepts, even including outdated and/or alternate hypotheses about some of the creatures and ideas presented. Many of these concepts have a strong potential to bog down more casual readers in a lot of technical jargon, but as noted before, Howard deftly avoids ever giving the reader the sensation of being the victim of an excessive info-dump, managing to break the big ideas down into an easy-to-understand but never pandering format. It helps that the book maintains a very light-hearted and humorous tone throughout its run. It somehow accomplishes the feat of making a serious effort to do right by its subject material, while at the same time not taking the whole setup too seriously as a narrative.
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!
JD-man

Replies: 85
Views: 9922

Search in: Dinosaur Jungles   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeMon Nov 08, 2021 4:38 am
My 82nd review for this thread is a negative 1 for Brusha et al.'s Discovery Channel's Dinosaurs & Prehistoric Predators. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Helpful" votes it can get because it's outnumbered by opposing reviews (which don't give a good idea of what to expect). Many thanks in advance.

1 of the worst I've ever reviewed ( https://www.amazon.com/review/RUDUVTOQRKLDV/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): 1/5

Short version: If you want the best collection of day-in-the-life dino stories, get Stout's The New Dinosaurs & read it in conjunction with other, more recent books (E.g. Naish/Barrett's Dinosaurs: How They Lived and Evolved). If you want the best educational graphic novel about dinos, get Howard's Dinosaur Empire! (Earth Before Us #1): Journey through the Mesozoic Era & read it in conjunction with other, more adult books (E.g. Naish/Barrett's book). Brusha et al.'s Discovery Channel's Dinosaurs & Prehistoric Predators (henceforth DC) fails at being either of these or even just decent in its own right. In fact, in some ways, it fails more than any other dino book I've ever reviewed.

Long version: Read on.

While I can't say that any 1 dino book is the worst ever, I can say that DC is 1 of the worst I've ever reviewed. Everything about DC feels like the ultimate cheap cash-in. Put another way, imagine what it'd be like if Dingo Pictures ( https://phelous.com/tag/dingo-pictures/ ) had made The Christmas Tree ( https://phelous.com/2016/12/21/phelous/and-the-movies/the-christmas-tree/ ). DC is equivalent to that. In this review, I list the 4 main reasons why I think that is, besides the lack of expert consulting.*

1) Let me walk you through how bad DC's paleoart is: 1st, as a basis for comparison, see the mostly-accurate T. rex on the cover of Abramson et al.'s Inside Dinosaurs from around the same time; Then, see the shameless rip-off of the Jurassic Park T. rex on DC's cover; If you're anything like me when I 1st saw DC, you're probably thinking something like, "At least it looks good...Maybe it's worth a look inside"; However, I soon realized it isn't when I saw that the introductory T. rex are both shameless rip-offs of the JP T. rex & extremely outdated/abominable ones at that (I.e. 3-fingered bunny hands, big blocky scales, etc: http://is4.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Purple/v4/e4/0f/1f/e40f1f83-00cd-7092-3c46-47ebbce02eaf/source/480x351bb.jpg ); Worse still, they're inconsistently abominable (I.e. Their shapes/proportions/colors vary from panel to panel) & depicted in what looks like an inappropriately-modern environment that's been painted over with CG (E.g. Grass, grass everywhere).

2) DC may have the most annoyingly-inconsistent writing. This is especially apparent in the Fact Files: Some list both common & scientific names (I.e. Genus & Genus+species, respectively) while others only list common names; Some incorrectly capitalize the species part of scientific names while others don't; Some translate common names while others translate scientific names; Some put the translation in quotes while others don't; Some list orders or suborders under "Dinosaur type" (E.g. "Theropoda" for Allosaurus) while others list families (E.g. "Dromaeosaurids" for Velociraptor) & still others list neither (E.g. "Armored" for Ankylosaurus); Some include "Period" after "Jurassic" or "Cretaceous" while others don't; Some list continents under "Fossils Found" while others list countries & still others list states. The main text writing is also annoyingly inconsistent in terms of bolding & punctuation as well as annoyingly hyperbolic & all-caps (E.g. See the 1st Brusha et al. quote; The originally-bolded words are in brackets; However, I refuse to type the quote out in all-caps, hence why it's all lowercase).

3) DC may be the most hit-&-miss in terms of getting the facts straight. This is especially apparent in the Fact Files because the misses stick out more with less text.** However, as bad as the "FACT FILE" misses are, the main text misses may be even worse in degree (E.g. See the 1st Brusha et al. quote; In actuality, Velociraptor was beaver-sized & lived in a desert environment).

4) Despite only accounting for 0.5/5 stars, organization may be the worst aspect of DC in terms of what it implies: For 1, the introductory & concluding chapters consist of a few sparsely & vaguely-written paragraphs/sentences; This is especially apparent in "TIMELINE" (E.g. See the 2nd Brusha et al. quote, which represents 2 back-to-back paragraphs about the Cretaceous; Notice that nothing is explained & there is no logical transition or flow); This implies that DC was just thrown together; For another, the stories themselves are arranged alphabetically, beginning with Allosaurus & ending with Velociraptor; This works in alphabet books (which are for younger kids) & certain reference works, but that's about it; This implies that the creators of DC don't think highly of their older kid audience.

*Not that the Discovery Channel was doing a good job consulting with experts at the time, even when it had experts to consult with ( https://svpow.com/2009/12/15/lies-damned-lies-and-clash-of-the-dinosaurs/ ).

**Even if you only read the Fact Files, you'll see that there's an average of at least 3 or 4 factual errors per page in DC, a 120 page book (E.g. Velociraptor =/= Russian obligate pack hunter; Also, the "Late Cretaceous Period" is NOT an "Era", hence the "Period").

Quoting Brusha et al.:
Quote :
80 million years ago a predator not much larger than our modern day lion terrorized the forests and plains of the late cretaceous period...the velociraptor was armed with a more impressive array of [weapons] than a lion, or any [other] predator that walks the earth today.


Quoting Brusha et al.:
Quote :
The cretaceous period is the most explosive period as dinosaur, animal, and fish diversity grew in scope. Pangea's component parts split further, a harbinger of more dramatic changes that would eventually doom the dinosaurs. The dinosaur began to evolve into species that not only ate plants but meat...The non-avian dinosaurs struggled to find food and their populations declined. The long-necked beasts that thrived on plants were gone. The cretaceous-tertiary extinction events remain a mystery but the results were clear: The day of the dinosaur has ended.
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!
JD-man

Replies: 85
Views: 9922

Search in: Dinosaur Jungles   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeMon Sep 06, 2021 10:39 pm
My 80th review for this thread is a positive 1 for Wexo's Dinosaurs (Prehistoric zoobooks). If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Helpful" votes it can get because it's for a very good book that deserves more attention. Many thanks in advance.

2 halves of a whole natural history ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R1IW2MGUI49TB0/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): 4/5

As you may remember, I've always wanted a sequel issue to Wexo's Zoobooks - Dinosaurs (henceforth ZD: https://www.amazon.com/review/RAVE9K9147YWQ/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ). I've since realized that ZD has had an unofficial sequel since 1989, Wexo's Dinosaurs (Prehistoric zoobooks) (henceforth DP). If I didn't know better, I'd say ZD & DP were made to be read together because of how well they complete each other (hence the title of this review):
-On the 1 hand, ZD is very authoritative (I.e. It's consulted by Colbert, Ostrom, & Olshevsky), but poorly-organized. Furthermore, it covers MUCH more about the human significance of dinos, the dino family tree, & the evolution of small dinos into birds than DP.
-On the other hand, DP is very well-organized (I.e. It has a roughly chronological format, beginning 225 MYA & ending 65 MYA), but not authoritative. Furthermore, it covers MUCH more about the evolution of dinos from earlier reptiles, biology/ecology/behavior, & the geological time scale than ZD.

I recommend reading ZD & DP both together & in conjunction with other, more recent books (E.g. Howard's Dinosaur Empire! (Earth Before Us #1): Journey through the Mesozoic Era).
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!
JD-man

Replies: 85
Views: 9922

Search in: Dinosaur Jungles   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeMon Sep 06, 2021 10:25 pm
My 79th review for this thread is a positive 1 for Cavan's Planet Dinosaur: The Next Generation of Killer Giants. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Helpful" votes it can get because it's for a very good book that deserves more attention. Many thanks in advance.

This makes a better book than doc ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R3GXLAGLI9FLDJ/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): 4/5

Short version: If you have to choose between the Planet Dinosaur doc (henceforth PD #1) & Cavan's Planet Dinosaur: The Next Generation of Killer Giants (henceforth PD #2), I recommend reading PD #2 in conjunction with other, more recent books (E.g. Naish/Barrett's Dinosaurs: How They Lived and Evolved).

Long version: Read on.

PD #1 (which is decent in its own right) was billed as the new Walking With Dinosaurs (which is the 1st natural history doc about dinos). It didn't pan out that way. As a result, people seem to forget how good PD #2 is. More specifically, PD #2 isn't just a very good companion book, but also a very good stand-alone book that tells the story of dinos MUCH better than PD #1. In fact, PD #2 is an even better stand-alone natural history of dinos than most of the WWD books, especially Haines' Walking with Dinosaurs: A Natural History (which it's most often compared to). In this review, I list the 3 main reasons why I think PD #2 is that good.

1) Most natural histories of dinos have a chronological or day-in-the-life format. This makes sense given that they're the easiest & best ways to tell the story of dinos, respectively. However, unlike the chronological format that makes WWD feel so epic in both book form & doc form, the day-in-the-life format of PD works MUCH better in book form than doc form. This is because, to paraphrase Ben ( https://extinctmonsters.net/2015/01/14/framing-fossil-exhibits-a-walk-through-time/ ), "audiences are predisposed to understand the forward progression of time, so little up-front explanation [I.e. Backstory] is needed." Meanwhile, day-in-the-life requires a lot more backstory to set up the events of the main story & tie them all together. Without said backstory, the main story doesn't make much sense. Part of the problem with PD #1 is that it only has a few sentences of backstory at the beginning of each episode (See the Hurt quote). PD #2 solves this problem with 4 pages of backstory in the Introduction. Also, PD #2 switches up the order of "The New Giants" & "Taking Flight" (I.e. PD #1's "New Giants" & "Feathered Dragons", respectively), making the main story as a whole flow better.*

2) Unlike WWD in general & Haines' book in particular, PD "made the point of showing/stating which bits of evidence have allowed scientists to come to the palaeobiological conclusions that they have" ( https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/tetrapod-zoology/vertebrate-palaeontology-at-lyme-regis/ ). Furthermore, while Darren Naish was only involved in PD #1 "on an at-the-end-of-the-phone basis", he "had full, unconditional control" to tweak the technical stuff in PD #2 ( https://web.archive.org/web/20151105233917/https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/tetrapod-zoology/happy-6th-birthday-tetrapod-zoology-part-ii/ ). Thus, PD #2 is more complete, in-depth, & accurate. This is especially apparent in the following ways:
-To paraphrase Albertonykus ( https://albertonykus.blogspot.com/2011/11/planet-dinosaur-great-survivors.html ), "One of the less desirable characteristics of [PD #1] is that it's very theropod centric...Planet Dinosaur probably should have been called "Planet Theropod"." PD #2 solves this problem with profiles of almost every featured sauropodomorph & ornithiscian (I.e. Argentinosaurus, Paralititan, Ouranosaurus, Chasmosaurus, Edmontosaurus, Camptosaurus, & Stegosaurus).
-In PD #1, Microraptor & Sinornithosaurus are depicted as being splay-legged & venomous, respectively. Surprise surprise, said depictions are based on debunked BANDit claims (BAND = Birds Are Not Dinosaurs). Anyway, PD #2 solves this problem with critiques of said depictions, concluding that 1) "it was simply impossible for Microraptor to adopt this posture", & 2) "the idea that Sinornithosaurus might have delivered a venomous bite was never well supported and the majority of dinosaur experts regarded it as poorly founded right from the start". For more info about conclusion #1, google "TESTING FLIGHT IN MICRORAPTOR". For more info about conclusion #2, google "Sinornithosaurus Probably Wasn’t Venomous After All".

3) Unlike WWD (which has CG dinos on real backgrounds), PD has CG dinos within CG backgrounds. To quote Dinosaur Guy ( https://whendinosaursruledthemind.wordpress.com/2015/02/01/when-dinosaurs-ruled-the-mind-50-top-10-best-and-worst-dinosaur-documentaries/ ), "You may think this would make the series look cheap, but I think it benefits from this in several ways. First of all, this allows many more species of dinosaurs to be featured...Secondly, this allows them to create period accurate dinosaur landscapes. Any modern area they would like to film in would never be 100% accurate to the actual Mesozoic (the Mesozoic had very little to no grass, yet you would never know from most dino docs, which feature vast grasslands all the time). Thirdly, this allows the dinosaurs to flow seamlessly in their environment. In most dinosaur documentaries, you can tell where the camera footage begins and where the CG  begins, and can be distracting to some. But here, the dinosaurs actually look like they belong to the environment." 1 of my only problems is that some of the CG is a bit off (E.g. To quote Naish, "the animals didn’t run well, they sometimes looked a bit… well, rubbery, and temporal fenestrae and so on often looked way too ‘hollow’").**

*"The New Giants" is 1st. Thus, the main story begins with non-bird dinos being born & ends with them dying. Also, "Taking Flight" is penultimate. Thus, its short story of 2 Gigantoraptor mating leads more directly into the last chapter's short story of them nesting.

**My other problem is some inaccurate/contradictory text (E.g. On page 42, it's claimed that 40ft = 12.2m in the sidebar & 10m in the main text) & weird/inconsistent writing (E.g. Not all of the profiles list the species epithet; Of those that do, not all of them translate it).

Quoting Hurt (who narrated PD #1):
Quote :
We're living through the golden age of dinosaur discoveries. All over the world, a whole new generation of dinosaurs is being revealed...from the biggest giants and the deadliest killers to the weird and wonderful; from the Arctic to Africa, from South America to Asia. In just the last few years, we have uncovered the extraordinary fossils, exquisitely preserved and tantalizingly intact. Combined with the latest in imaging technology, we have been able to probe deeper and reveal more than ever before. It gives us our first truly global view of these incredible animals.
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!
JD-man

Replies: 85
Views: 9922

Search in: Dinosaur Jungles   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeMon Jul 05, 2021 6:56 am
My 78th review for this thread is a negative 1 for Stamper's Dinosaur Detectives (The Magic School Bus Science Chapter Book #9). If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Helpful" votes it can get because it's outnumbered by opposing reviews (which don't give a good idea of what to expect). Many thanks in advance.

Here we go again ( https://www.amazon.com/review/RZZ4R6IK9VL5N/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): 1/5

Short version: If you want a good Magic School Bus dino book, get Cole's The Magic School Bus in the Time of the Dinosaurs & read it in conjunction with other, more recent books (E.g. Holtz's Dinosaurs).* All other Magic School Bus dino books should be avoided, especially Stamper's Dinosaur Detectives (The Magic School Bus Science Chapter Book #9) (henceforth DD).

Long version: Read on.

I wasn't expecting DD to be even worse than Schwabacher's The Magic School Bus Flies with the Dinosaurs ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R1SNCFJECE6XS1/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ), especially given Holtz's involvement, but in some ways, it is. In this review, I list those ways.

1) DD is even worse in terms of the characters & story. At least with Schwabacher's book, one could argue that 1) the characters act more like they do in Cole's book than they do in the show, & 2) the story is short. Unfortunately, DD is basically a worse version of the show:
-In reference to the characters, this is especially apparent in Ms. Frizzle (who acts more like a normal teacher than the wacky, zany character I know/love), Liz (who acts more like a normal pet than the humanly-sentient character I know/love), Arnold (who acts more like a Flanderized version of the relatable character I know/love, so basically, himself in The Magic School Bus Rides Again), & Ralphie: Like each episode of the show, each of Stamper's books focuses on 1 character; In DD, that's Ralphie, who acts more like Carlos does in the show than he does in the show (I.e. He tells more bad jokes & laughs at more of Carlos' bad jokes); See reasons #1 & 3 in my review of the show for why The Magic School Bus should never focus on Carlos-type characters ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R1A9PA105I2590/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ).
-In reference to the story, this is especially apparent in 2 major ways: 1) It's more character-driven in DD than it is in Cole's book (which is bad because the characters range from bland to awful); 2) It's filled with so much dialogue that DD reads more like a script than a book (which is bad because the dialogue is poorly written).

2) DD is similarly hit-&-miss in terms of getting the facts straight. This is especially apparent in the sidebars because the misses stick out more with less text (E.g. See all 3 Stamper quotes, especially the 1st one; Dino eggs didn't just hold the baby & a yolk, "big plant eaters" didn't lay the biggest eggs, & sauropods typically didn't lay eggs of that shape & size).

3) DD is even worse in terms of writing (which is saying a lot):
-It's annoyingly cobbled together from different parts of Cole's book (E.g. See the 1st & 2nd Stamper quotes).
-It's annoyingly redundant (E.g. 1st, in the main text, D.A. says, "They're extinct. That means not one member of their species is still alive"; Then, in her report on the same page, she says, "Dinosaurs are extinct. Not one of their kind is still alive").
-It's annoyingly simplified (E.g. 1st, see the 2nd Stamper quote; Then, see reason #1 in my review of Schwabacher's book).
-It's annoyingly weird (E.g. See the 3rd Stamper quote; Why "a" Plateosaurus?; & why did it stand "long"?; Why the "also"?).

4) DD is even worse in terms of art (which, again, is saying a lot):
-It's annoyingly contradictory with the text (E.g. According to the text, the baby Diplodocus are green; According to the cover art, they're not).
-It's annoyingly contradictory with itself (I.e. Some of the life reconstructions are based on those in the show, others are tracings of those in Cole's book, & still others are original).
-It's annoyingly outdated/abominable: In reference to outdated, this is especially apparent in the unfeathered Troodon (Quoting Holtz: "Depicting a Troodon or a Velociraptor without feathers...would simply be antiscientific"); In reference to abominable, this is especially apparent in Enik's multi-species scenes (which, stylistically, look like they're from "A Sloppy Art Coloring Book"); Worse still, they're inconsistently abominable (I.e. The same dinos look more realistic in some scenes & more cartoony in others); In reference to both, this is especially apparent when comparing Enik's baby Diplodocus on the cover of DD to Mick Ellison's mostly-accurate baby Diplodocus from around the same time ( https://paleoaerie.org/2013/11/07/day-1-at-svp/ ).

*For an even better version of Cole's book, see Howard's Dinosaur Empire! (which I reviewed: https://www.amazon.com/review/R17ZWNPWDUKZWI/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ).

Quoting Stamper (who cobbled this together from Amanda Jane's "WHAT WERE SAUROPODS?" & Molly's "HOW BIG WERE DINOSAUR EGGS?"):
Quote :
Dinosaurs Laid Eggs by Wanda
Baby dinosaurs hatched from eggs. Dinosaur eggs held the baby animal and a yolk. The yolk was the animal's food until it hatched.
Big plant eaters laid the biggest eggs. Sauropods were heavy, long-necked plant eaters, and they laid football-shaped eggs. Their eggs were 1 foot long and 10 inches wide!


Quoting Stamper (who cobbled this together from the main text & Carmen's "HOW A DEAD DINOSAUR COULD BECOME A FOSSIL"):
Quote :
How Fossils Form by Tim
A fossil is created when an animal or plant dies and is buried in the ground. Over time, the hard parts of the animal, such as bones and teeth, are preserved by surrounding minerals. These hard parts turn into rock and become a fossil.


Quoting Stamper:
Quote :
Dino Data File
A Plateosaurus was one of the first long-necked plant eaters in the Triassic Period. It stood 27 feet long and weighed 1,500 pounds. It could also rear up and use its hands to pull leaves off trees.
Fun Fact: Plateosaurus had weak teeth. These weren't much help against large predators. Its large thumb claw was its best defense!
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: Palaeowins Mk. II
JD-man

Replies: 49
Views: 4623

Search in: The Museum   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: Palaeowins Mk. II    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeSun Jul 04, 2021 6:24 pm
JD-man wrote:
The positive reviews in "JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!" ( https://jurassicmainframe.forumotion.com/t479-jd-man-s-serious-dino-books-dino-related-reviews ) are for paleowins. As of this post, there's Gardom/Milner's The Natural History Museum Book of Dinosaurs, Norell et al.'s Discovering Dinosaurs: Evolution, Extinction, and the Lessons of Prehistory, Expanded and Updated, Lessem's Dinosaur Worlds, Wild Kratts, Bakker's Prehistoric Monsters, Sloan's Feathered Dinosaurs, Martill/Naish's Walking with Dinosaurs: The Evidence - How Did They Know That?, Bakker's Maximum Triceratops, Bakker's Dino Babies!, Sattler's Tyrannosaurus Rex and Its Kin: The Mesozoic Monsters, Zoehfeld's Dinosaur Parents, Dinosaur Young: Uncovering the Mystery of Dinosaur Families, & Schlein's The Puzzle of the Dinosaur-bird: The Story of Archaeopteryx (which is where the Jurassic Park Legacy thread left off). I'll add to "Palaeowins Mk. II" as I add to "JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!".


I've since added Howard's Dinosaur Empire! (Earth Before Us #1): Journey through the Mesozoic Era (page 3).

Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe 43908907._SY475_
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!
JD-man

Replies: 85
Views: 9922

Search in: Dinosaur Jungles   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeSun Jul 04, 2021 6:12 pm
My 77th review for this thread is a positive 1 for Howard's Dinosaur Empire! (Earth Before Us #1): Journey through the Mesozoic Era. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Helpful" votes it can get because it's for a great book that deserves more attention. Many thanks in advance.

Like The Magic School Bus, but better ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R17ZWNPWDUKZWI/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): 5/5

I was originally planning on reviewing Howard's Dinosaur Empire! (Earth Before Us #1): Journey through the Mesozoic Era (henceforth DE) the way I usually review good dino books. However, I then remembered that Witton's DE review is so perfect, especially when it comes to outlining "why the Earth Before Us books are so terrific" ( http://markwitton-com.blogspot.com/2019/12/interview-with-abby-howard-author-and.html ), that I can't possibly top it, so I won't even try. Instead, in this review, I'll point you to Witton's DE review & add my own thoughts as well:
-DE reminds me of Cole's The Magic School Bus books in 2 major ways: 1) Ronnie/Ms. Lernin's dynamic is similar to that of Arnold/Ms. Frizzle, but better (I.e. There are no other characters to distract from the story); 2) DE's "smart narrative device" is similar to that of Cole's books, but better (I.e. It's less theatrical & more direct). As you may remember, the characters & story are major reasons why Cole's books are so much better than the "Magic School Bus" show (See reasons #1 & 3: https://www.amazon.com/review/R1A9PA105I2590/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ).
-To add to the Magic School Bus analogy, DE's "Learning Centre" reminds me of the reports in Cole's books. More specifically, both "explain a major concept of biology or palaeontology, but otherwise [the characters] move through time and space with pace and fluidity."
-In reference to "the interpretations [Howard presents being] accurate to modern science", it's worth mentioning that there are a few weird bits in the text (E.g. Deinocheirus is referred to as a herbivore) & paleoart (E.g. Tsintaosaurus is depicted with the outdated phallic crest). Otherwise, Witton's right.
-It's also worth mentioning that DE fills a very important role as a great natural history of dinos for older kids. There have been several great natural histories of dinos for younger kids & adults in recent years (E.g. Chuang/Yang's THEM: Age Of Dinosaurs & Norell's The World of Dinosaurs: An Illustrated Tour, respectively: https://www.amazon.com/review/R3R6KZA4VWB8E6/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ), but nothing great for older kids since the 1990s.
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: Why I can't take Jurassic Jabber seriously
JD-man

Replies: 1
Views: 347

Search in: The Museum   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: Why I can't take Jurassic Jabber seriously    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeWed Feb 10, 2021 8:01 am
I originally posted the following at deviantART ( https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-Why-I-can-t-take-Jurassic-Jabber-seriously-869779717 ).

Quote :
Hi everybody,

I recently reviewed Dixon's worst dino book (I.e. "If Dinosaurs Were Alive Today": https://www.amazon.com/review/R2906RZLY2I88D/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ), which was the last straw "that made [me] cease taking Dougal Dixon seriously" as a source of dino info ( https://chasmosaurs.blogspot.com/2011/11/not-vintage-dinosaur-art-if-dinosaurs.html ). Similarly, Jurassic Jabber's recommendation of Blasing's "Dinosaurs! My First Book About Carnivores" (which I'm in the process of reviewing) was the last straw that made me cease taking JJ seriously as a source of dino info ( https://www.facebook.com/JurassicJabber/posts/2682380538690151 ). This isn't the 1st time JJ has promoted a not-so-good dino book, but it IS the most egregious example:* For 1, Blasing's book is educational non-fiction (& thus, should be held to a higher standard than the other books, which are educational fiction); For another, when I questioned/commented on JJ's recommendation (See quote #1), they either replied w/misleading/wrong/irrelevant claims or didn't reply at all (See quotes #2-3). I don't know whether JJ overlooked the many problems w/Blasing's book on purpose or by accident, but I do know that, either way, it shows that JJ shouldn't be taken seriously as a source of dino info.

*I'm specifically referring to Braun's "Could You Survive the Cretaceous Period?" ( https://www.jurassicjabber.com/single-post/2019/09/18/this-new-interactive-book-series-is-buzzing-right-now ) & Galusha's "Cretaceous" ( https://www.jurassicjabber.com/single-post/2019/01/11/prehistoric-predators-battle-it-out-in-this-exclusive-cretaceous-preview ).

Cheers,
Herman Diaz

Quote #1 (me): "I hope you don't mind, but I have to ask: Are you recommending Blasing's new book b/c 1) he's a friend, or 2) b/c you actually think it's a good book? I really didn't wanna have to ask b/c neither answer is good: If #1, it comes off as irresponsible, similar to hiring a friend even though you know they're not right for the job; If #2, it implies that you overlooked the book's many problems; More specifically, it's full of ugly/inaccurate paleoart (E.g. Oversaturated colors, scaly-skinned coelurosaurs, etc) & misleading/wrong claims (E.g. "Did you know a Tyrannosaurus rex had an infectious bite?": https://www.amazon.com/Dinosaurs-First-About-Carnivores-Beyond/dp/1646114299 ); It doesn't help that he's still promoting himself as a paleontologist even though he still hasn't published any peer-reviewed literature ( https://svpow.com/2010/11/12/tutorial-10-how-to-become-a-palaeontologist/ ); Put another way, he's "impersonating a professional in the field, and in the process, he is misleading the public when he talks so matter of factly about some of his subjects" ( http://reptilis.net/2008/09/14/jfc-lockjaw/ )."

Quoting #2 (JJ): "hello. I’d like to first point out that George Blasing has never once said he was a paleontologists. But a dinosaur enthusiast who has studied and worked with doctors like Larry witmer, robert Bakker, Paul serino. He has also done countless interviews with paleontologists on his podcasts. So the information he is getting is directly from the source. It has been speculated by many paleontologists that it would be very easy for flesh to remain in between teeth of a tyrannosaur and rot. Transferring nasty bacteria to another animal with a bite. It is quite possible as some animals do this today.

George blasing travels to schools and get kids excited about dinosaurs. It’s people like him who help the future of the field. He takes what he learns and passes it on. Never once claiming any of this information is his own.

There are a lot of paleontologists who are just don’t have time to talk to kids.

So to answer your questions. I respect him for what he does for the future of paleontology. Who knows how many kids will enter the field because of him. And two, I don’t believe there is nothing that he has written that is 💯 blatantly untrue. Colors of dinosaurs is something that is bran new in the field. We are only just starting to discover the variation and saturation of feathers of the past. Even jack Horner has said there is no reason a large carnivore could not be brightly colors. I think it is unlikely that they were but it is possible.

Thank you for being involved. Healthy debates are good."

Quote #3 (me): "Many thanks for getting back to me. However, I need to correct or clarify a few things.

"I’d like to first point out that George Blasing has never once said he was a paleontologists."

Actually, he's done so many times, including on his website ("Blasing is a self taught paleontologist and animal behaviorist": https://dinosaurgeorge.com/dinosaur-george-bio ), in his new book ("Blasing is an animal behaviorist, podcast host, and paleontologist"), & in JFC ("Paleontology Expert").

"It has been speculated by many paleontologists that it would be very easy for flesh to remain in between teeth of a tyrannosaur and rot. Transferring nasty bacteria to another animal with a bite."

Based on "the dirty myth of the Komodo's bite" (which has been known to be false for many years: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:mAFliqhZ_2AJ:https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/here-be-dragons-the-mythic-bite-of-the-komodo+&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us ).

"And two, I don’t believe there is nothing that he has written that is 💯 blatantly untrue."

The double negative notwithstanding, he's done so many times, especially in JFC (E.g. "When Mr. Blasing spouts off something patently wrong like “dromaeosaurs could breathe through their bones,” or “megalodon was the size of a jumbo jet,” the audience at home will come away accepting that as a fact": http://reptilis.net/2008/09/14/jfc-lockjaw/ ), but also in his books (E.g. "Giganotosaurus may have been able to run over 30 [mph]"; Not according to what we actually know about similarly-sized theropods: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5518979/ ).

"We are only just starting to discover the variation and saturation of feathers of the past. Even jack Horner has said there is no reason a large carnivore could not be brightly colors."

I think you're confused. I didn't say anything about the likelihood of large carnivores being bright colors. I did list the new book's oversaturated (as opposed to well-saturated) colors as 1 of many examples of its ugly/inaccurate paleoart. Heck, the scaly-skinned coelurosaurs alone should've disqualified it from being recommended as an educational book. Put another way, to paraphrase Holtz, "depicting a [non-tyrannosaurid coelurosaur] without feathers...would simply be antiscientific" ( https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-Holtz-s-A-Dinosaur-Lover-s-Bookshelf-374321353 ).

1 more thing: I also didn't say anything about problems w/Blasing's intentions (which seem to be good), just w/his execution (which is very bad)."
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!
JD-man

Replies: 85
Views: 9922

Search in: Dinosaur Jungles   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeSat Jan 02, 2021 7:10 am
My 71st review for this thread is a positive 1 for Dixon's The Big Book of Dinosaurs: A Natural History of the Prehistoric World. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Helpful" votes it can get because it's for a great book that deserves more attention. Many thanks in advance.

Dixon's best dino book ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R2PUKOSQNJNGTF/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): 5/5

Short version: Dixon's The Big Book of Dinosaurs: A Natural History of the Prehistoric World (henceforth BB) is definitely his best (& maybe only very-good-to-great) dino book. I recommend reading BB in conjunction with other, more recent books (E.g. Naish/Barrett's Dinosaurs: How They Lived and Evolved).

Long version: Read on.

Based on what I've read, Dixon is a nice guy ( https://matthewbonnan.wordpress.com/2013/12/26/now-the-circle-is-complete-or-a-belated-dinosaur-christmas-gift/ ), but a bad source of dino info. In fact, to quote GSPaul ( http://gspauldino.com/Tertiary.pdf ), "Dixon has a superfi-cial understanding of dinosaur and pterosaur biology, and of their actual evolutionary patterns- i. e. he is not familiar with the technical literature, a necessity since the popular literature re-mains incomplete and sometimes obsolete...In addition, he wants to make archosaurs more mammalian than is appropriate". With that in mind, I was both worried & surprised by BB: Worried that it'd be terrible, that it'd give natural histories of dinos a bad name, & that I'd have to review it as such; Surprised that I didn't know about it sooner, that it's as great as it is, & that it's so underrated. In this review, I list the 3 main reasons why I think BB is as great as it is.

1) BB is very well-organized: Most natural histories of dinos have a chronological or day-in-the-life format; This makes sense given that they're the easiest & best ways to tell the story of dinos, respectively; However, as far as I know, BB is the only natural history of dinos with an ecological format; After the introductory chapters (which summarize how ecology works & how dinos evolved), BB consists of 12 chapters, each of which focuses on a different trophic group (high browsers, low browsers & grazers, big-game hunters, small-game hunters, egg-eaters, scavengers, fish-eaters, marine reptiles, flying reptiles, birds & mammals) plus unsolved mysteries & the reconstruction process. I especially like how BB's organization reminds me of some natural histories of modern animals (E.g. Attenborough's The Life of Mammals). With that in mind, you'd think it'd be a more common way to put dinos into an evolutionary & ecological context, but I digress.

2) BB was mostly accurate at the time of publication. This is especially apparent in its T.rex-related text: 1st, see the Dixon quote; Then, compare it to the T.rex-related text in "Vintage Dinosaur Art: The Age of Dinosaurs: A Photographic Record" & "Vintage Dinosaur Art: Dinosaurs: Questions & Answers", which are reviews of Dixon dino books published shortly before & after BB, respectively; As you may remember, even some expert-authored books from around the same time got the same info wrong ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R1XKIJYJI2F8YU/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ). I say "mostly" because there are a few weird bits in the text (E.g. Ankylosaurus =/= 35 ft), but that's still pretty impressive for a Dixon dino book.

3) BB is very well-illustrated. Remember what I said about Sibbick's When Dinosaurs Ruled the Earth work compared to his later work (See reason #1: https://www.amazon.com/review/RJ6H99FGIW6CC/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 )? The same mostly goes for Kirk's BB work compared to his later work. However, Kirk's 1989 work was even more accurate for its time than Sibbick's 1985 work was for its time. Also, while I wouldn't describe the former as gritty, I would describe it as atmospheric, so much so that it reminds me of Douglas Henderson's paleoart. Kirk's Stenonychosaurus is an especially good example of that, partly because it's standing against a beautiful sunset, & partly because it has that look that birds have when they know they're being watched. Kirk's head-butting Pachycephalosaurus are another good example, partly because of how they're colored (I.e. Green & blue like Henderson's Saurolophus), & partly because of how they're wincing from the impact (as opposed to being wide-eyed like other, similar life reconstructions). You can see both dinos in Vincent's BB review ( https://chasmosaurs.com/tag/big-book-of-dinosaurs/ ). 1 more thing of note: As mentioned by Vincent, Kirk's life reconstructions are "nicely complimented by [David Nicholls'] pretty modern-looking" skeletal reconstructions.

Quoting Dixon:
Quote :
The accolade of the biggest and most ferocious hunter that ever lived has always been given to the enormous tyrannosaurid Tyrannosaurus. Some 40 feet...long it was, towering almost 20 feet...high and weighing 7 tons. The skull was 4 feet...long and bore teeth like steak knives. The bones of the skull were quite loosely articulated, so that the skull could flex and allow the animal to swallow huge chunks of meat. Yet in the 1960s some research was done that suggested that this beast could not have been as active and ferocious as it appeared. The shape of the hips seems to show that it could have taken only very short steps and must have moved at a speed of only about 3 miles...per hour. The teeth seem to have been more adapted to slashing up dead meat that to killing live animals. All this suggests that mighty Tyrannosaurus was actually a scavenger, not a hunter.
On the other hand, the eyes of Tyrannosaurus were positioned so that they could focus forward. Only hunting animals have eyes like this, since this arrangement gives a three-dimensional image and allows distances to be judged accurately. The skull and neck were very robust, suggesting that they were built to withstand the shock of delivering killing blows.
All in all, it looks as if Tyrannosaurus was a hunter after all. It may have hidden in undergrowth and ambushed duckbills, killing them with a blow of its wide-open mouth. However, an old Tyrannosaurus may have been too slow and heavy for this kind of action and lived as a scavenger, feeding on the corpses of animals that were already dead.
Tyrannosaurus had ridiculously small arms, with only two fingers. They could not possibly have been used in any killing or eating function. They were probably used to help the huge animal to get to its feet after resting on its belly. A massive foot on the end of the pubis bone in its hips and a set of extra ribs along the belly suggest that it spent much of its time lying on the ground. This may have been its customary eating position. When it rose to its feet it would have done so by straightening its huge hind legs. The little arms would have prevented it from sliding along onto its face while it did so.
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!
JD-man

Replies: 85
Views: 9922

Search in: Dinosaur Jungles   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeTue Nov 03, 2020 1:20 am
My 69th review for this thread is a positive 1 for Rey's Extreme Dinosaurs! Part 2: The Projects. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Helpful" votes it can get because it's for a great book that deserves more attention. Many thanks in advance.

1 beautiful dromaeosaurid! ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R30VGMGZ7WL3V4/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): 5/5

Short Version: At the time of publication, Rey's Extreme Dinosaurs (henceforth ED) was the best summary of the most extreme dino discoveries. Now, Rey's Extreme Dinosaurs! Part 2: The Projects (henceforth ED2) is the best. I recommend reading ED2 in conjunction with ED (which shows how far dino science & art has come in just 18 years) as well as "Luis V. Rey Blog" (which provides more info about most of Rey's ED2 work).

Long version: Read on.

As you may remember, I reviewed ED ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R1D5YN9OJS6MXU/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ). ED2 is both a sequel & a reboot, similar to Mary Poppins Returns, but actually good. In fact, in some ways, ED2 is even better than ED. In this review, I list the 3 main reasons why I think that is.

1) ED's Introduction begins with Rey's backstory ("Dinosaurs haunted my childhood") & ends with a description of ED's organization (See the 1st Rey quote). ED2's Introduction is very similar, but also very different: 1st, it not only continues where ED left off ("Ever since Extreme Dinosaurs was published almost 20 years ago, I have been intermittently involved in many publications"), but also adds to it ("When I was 10 years old, my main ambition in life was striving to live one day in my museum where people could come and discuss and enjoy science... and art!"); Then, it describes ED2's organization as a series of "more specifically themed concepts" along the line leading to "Dinosaurios Hechos En México" (See the 2nd Rey quote), similar to walking through a series of more exclusive clades along the line leading to modern animals. The differences make ED2 even better than ED: For 1, the extra backstory helps to explain ED2's organization; For another, it also adds depth to the main story without slowing it down; For yet another, to paraphrase Ben ( https://extinctmonsters.net/2015/02/26/framing-fossil-exhibits-phylogeny/ ), I'd argue that ED2's organization is "an attempt to train [readers] to look at [dinos] the way [Rey does]".

2) ED2 is more complete & in-depth than ED. In reference to "in-depth", this is especially apparent in "Project one. Dinosaur rEvolution. Secrets of survival": Rey "divided the project into two main tiers: two groups [theropods vs. ornithischians] and subgroups [tyrannosaurs & "clawed enigmas" vs. thyreophorans & marginocephalians, respectively] with different strategic paths that would encounter and battle each other all along the way"; Most of ED's chapters only briefly describe the most extreme dinos on a given continent. In reference to "complete", this is especially apparent in "Project four. Mexican Dinosaurs": Not only does it feature multiple photos of fossils like all of the other projects (including a very nice close-up of a "fossil muzzle"), but also skeletal drawings for 15 Mexican dinos (which are very incompletely known, but I digress); ED is full of great life reconstructions, but only features 2 photos & no drawings of the fossils on which they're based.

3) I couldn't say much about Rey's digital paleoart before ED2 other than that it was 1) overall not as good as his traditional paleoart, & 2) still some of the best paleoart around (See reason #1: https://www.amazon.com/review/RGGG87Q9W2PHE/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ). Now that I've seen it fully progress from Dinosaurs! in 2005 to ED2 in 2019, I can say that it's just as good as his traditional paleoart. While I'll always prefer the aesthetics of the latter, the former makes up for it in the following ways, among others (Again, see reason #1):
-To quote Witton ( https://markwitton-com.blogspot.com/2013/06/what-daleks-xenomorphs-and-slasher.html ), "Completely flat, horizontal ground stretching way off into the distance seem to occur in the overwhelming majority of palaeoart scenes...Sure, there may be some highlands and forests as a far-off backdrops and even sometimes in the middle distance, but the animals themselves keep to flat stages without inclination or slope. What's more...said animals often occupy patches of bare earth without vegetation." The same goes for many of Rey's traditional paleoart scenes, but not his digital ones. This is especially apparent when you compare ED2 T.rex scenes ( https://luisvrey.wordpress.com/2018/03/26/the-next-bone-of-contention/ ) to ED ones ( https://luisvrey.wordpress.com/2013/09/02/svpca-in-edinburgh-most-spectacular-of-settings/ ).
-Remember "Customising a life-size Velociraptor" from ED? Not only has Rey customized even more dino models since then, but he's also blended photos of them into his paeloart scenes. Put another way, to quote Holly Stuart Hughes (in reference to "Behind the Walls by Paolo Ventura"), Rey "continues to stretch not only his imagination but the techniques he uses to bring his imagined worlds to life." This is especially apparent in "Velociraptor attacks Avimimus" ( https://luisvrey.wordpress.com/2017/03/16/sneak-preview-dinosaur-revolution-embarks-in-its-first-tour/ ) as well as when comparing ED2's cover to ED's (hence the title of this review).

2 more things of note: 1) Officially, my only gripes are a few weird bits in the text (E.g. Saichania is referred to as "North American" & Tarchia as its "Mongolian relative" even though both are Mongolian) & writing (E.g. "T. rex" is incorrectly pluralized as "T. rexes"); 2) Unofficially, there are MANY missing/wrong words & punctuations throughout ED2; However, I can't hold those against Rey as they're not his fault; "Since [ED2] is a very personal book that no publishing house has been able to take on board, I decided that to preserve the original concept and intention, the only way it would have been properly published is by yours truly. With your support this might become a reality" ( https://luisvrey.wordpress.com/2019/07/08/extreme-dinosaurs-ii-the-projects/ ); The Kickstarter campaign didn't pan out, so he had to edit ED2 himself despite being neither a professional editor nor an English native speaker.

Quoting Rey:
Quote :
More bizarre dinosaurs are being found all the time, all over the world. The first dinosaurs were found in Europe, the United States, and Canada. But today, China, Mongolia, Africa, and South America have become the dinosaur hunters' paradise. Let's circle the globe and see some of the most weird and wonderful creatures ever.


Quoting Rey:
Quote :
The “Extreme Dinosaurs II, The Projects” chapters are not by chronological order, but by their evolutionary significance. I start with the wide-scope Dinosaur rEvolution, which is in itself my interpretation of the new evidence on dinosaur external appearance and their relationship with birds. This has been an age-old personal struggle that also was pretty evident in the original “Extreme Dinosaurs”. The rEvolution is followed by more specifically themed concepts, like the Maniraptora Family Tree in “Dinosaurs Take Wing”; next is dinosaurs as living, breathing animals represented by their family behaviour in “Hatching The Past”... and finally a monograph of a rare specific fauna in one part of the world, that not only has been virtually overlooked, it has special significance to me since I grew up there: “Dinosaurios Hechos En México”. And that completes the circle.
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!
JD-man

Replies: 85
Views: 9922

Search in: Dinosaur Jungles   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeFri Sep 04, 2020 5:51 pm
My 68th review for this thread is a negative 1 for Jenkins' Big Golden Book of Dinosaurs. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Helpful" votes it can get because it's outnumbered by opposing reviews (which don't give a good idea of what to expect: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2662424-big-golden-book-of-dinosaurs ). Many thanks in advance.

The GINO of dino books ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R152NTPSAWTGUX/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): 1/5

You know how the Godzilla of the 1998 movie "is commonly called G.I.N.O. (Godzilla In Name Only)...to distinguish it from the "real" Godzilla" ( https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Trivia/Godzilla1998 )? Despite its title, Jenkins' Big Golden Book of Dinosaurs (henceforth BG) is nothing like Watson's childhood classic or the remakes by Elting (which is decent) & Bakker (which is the best natural history of dinos for kids: https://www.amazon.com/review/R2INIHTO7ANTSM/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ). In this review, I list the 3 main reasons why BG is the GINO of dino books.

1) While the Watson, Elting, & Bakker books are all natural histories of dinos with a chronological format, BG is basically just another Dinosaur (DK Eyewitness Books) wannabe: For 1, there are many sidebars scattered all over each chapter with no apparent rhyme or reason; For another, there are many 2-page chapters scattered all over BG with no apparent rhyme or reason.

2) Remember what I said about Schwabacher's The Magic School Bus Flies with the Dinosaurs (See reason #1: https://www.amazon.com/review/R1SNCFJECE6XS1/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 )? The same mostly goes for BG in terms of text & writing. In fact, "How fossils form" on page 6 of BG is basically just a wordier version of "THE STORY OF FOSSILS". Furthermore, not only does BG avoid using the word "evolution", but it synonymizes "developed" with "evolved" ( http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/04/2/l_042_02.html ).

3) Remember what I said about Theodorou's I Wonder Why Triceratops Had Horns: and Other Questions about Dinosaurs ( https://www.amazon.com/review/RGU1QQZ5DR8A5/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 )? The same mostly goes for BG in terms of paleoart. In reference to BG's "more realistic reconstructions", this is especially apparent in the abominable T.rex & the outdated Brachiosaurus on the alternative cover. The former is so abominable, in fact, that there was a "Caption Competition" making fun of it as such ( https://chasmosaurs.blogspot.com/2012/03/caption-competition.html ).
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: Top 4 most annoyingly-popular dino hypotheses.
JD-man

Replies: 1
Views: 598

Search in: The Museum   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: Top 4 most annoyingly-popular dino hypotheses.    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeSat May 23, 2020 5:35 am
I originally posted the following at deviantART ( https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-Most-annoyingly-popular-dino-hypotheses-addend-842963661 ).

Quote :
This journal entry is an addendum to "SD: Top 4 most annoyingly-popular dino hypotheses" ( https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-Top-4-most-annoyingly-popular-dino-hypotheses-395469447 ). I hope that at least some of you will get something out of it.

#3 Update) I've since come around to this hypothesis, partly b/c I was told to think about it in the context of Nanotyrannus (which helps to explain the seemingly adult features of Dracorex: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/the-origin-of-a-little-tyrant-130792981/ ), & partly b/c I was told to think about it in the context of Triceratops (which, like Pachycephalosaurus, became less spiky w/age: http://whenpigsfly-returns.blogspot.com/2010/07/toroceratops.html ).

#1 Update) I've since come around to this hypothesis, partly b/c I was told to think about it in the context of green iguanas (See 13:00-14:30, which helps to explain baby sauropod digestion: https://archive.org/details/WildlifeDocumentaries/Wildlife+On+One+-+S31+-+E04+-+Iguanas%2C+Living+Like+Dinosaurs.avi ), & partly b/c I was told to think about it in the context of geese (See 12:00-13:30, which also helps to explain baby sauropod digestion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bj0wBMkr5M ).

New #3 Contender) Tie btwn 1) Spinosaurus being quadrupedal ( https://sci-hub.tw/https://science.sciencemag.org/content/345/6204/1613 ), & 2) theropods not having lips (See "Fig. 3": https://sci-hub.tw/https://science.sciencemag.org/content/293/5531/850 ):
-1) Now that "Ibrahim et al. 2020b" has been published, this hypothesis isn't as annoyingly-popular (See "Posture and balance": https://markwitton-com.blogspot.com/2020/05/spinosaurus-2020-thoughts-for-artists.html ). However, btwn 2014-2020, it was everywhere, even in otherwise great books.* My major problem is that it's "an extraordinary claim, but [the paper] fails to provide extraordinary evidence for the proportions and center of gravity that make or break this claim" ( https://www.skeletaldrawing.com/home/there-may-be-more-fishiness-in-spinosaurus9132014 ).
-2) Despite the fact that we've known better since at least the "Dinosaur Renaissance" (See pages 142-145: http://doc.rero.ch/record/232376/files/PAL_E1363.pdf ) & have gone through the "All Yesterdays" movement (a large part of which was un-shrink-wrapping: https://svpow.com/2010/12/13/pimp-my-pod-2-haids/ ), this hypothesis keeps coming back. My major problem is that it seems to rely on hand-waving/ignoring the fact that theropod oral anatomy is MUCH more like that of lipped tetrapods than lipless ones. Said anatomy it best described by Hartman ( https://www.skeletaldrawing.com/home/the-lip-post1 ) & best illustrated by GSPaul (See "Archosaur Lip Anatomy", page 26: http://assets.press.princeton.edu/chapters/i10851.pdf ).

*I'm specifically referring to Chuang/Yang's "THEM: Age Of Dinosaurs" ( https://blog.everythingdinosaur.co.uk/blog/_archives/2018/09/07/chinese-dinosaur-art-spinosaurus.html ) & Norell's "The World of Dinosaurs: An Illustrated Tour" ("Theropods were for the most part bipedal, yet a few, such as Spinosaurus, may have been secondarily quadrupedal").

New #1 Contender) "Juvenile and adult [Deinonychus] likely consumed different prey" & thus didn't live in packs ( https://drive.google.com/file/d/18-dpj__D1KlMLW71XIvAjgXmDRNYDTsm/view ). I have 2 major problems w/this hypothesis: 1) Its results don't really support its conclusions;* 2) It ignores A LOT of contradictory evidence.**

*Quoting Willoughby ( https://www.facebook.com/groups/16791880228/permalink/10158674121970229/?comment_id=10158676048850229&reply_comment_id=10158676129635229 ): "A handful of teeth were taken from two sites, divided into a large (adult) and small (juvenile) group of 5 to 6 teeth each, and then a t-test computed for significant mean differences. Only one of the two sites showed a mean diff across size/age groups at p < .05, the other did not."

**In reference to consuming different prey:
-It ignores the fact that raptorial birds feed their young smaller prey than what they'd normally catch for themselves (Golden eagles: https://static02.nmbu.no/mina/studier/moppgaver/2012-Skouen.pdf ) (Sparrowhawks: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00063657.2014.940838 ). Since eudromaeosaurs were basically "terrestrial hawks" in terms of ecology/behavior ( https://qilong.wordpress.com/2011/12/19/dromaeosaurs-are-terrestrial-hawks/ ), it makes sense that the same would've gone for them. This reminds me of how much I miss "ASK A VELOCIRAPTOR" (which summed up what we knew or could infer about real Velociraptor in a silly/fun way): https://askvelociraptor.tumblr.com/post/23590224406/while-currently-lacking-any-females-andor
-It uses Varricchio et al. 2008 to argue that Deinonychus had Rhea-like paternal care despite the facts that 1) that paper doesn't cover any dromaeosaurids, let alone eudromaeosaurs, & 2) unlike the "more stork-like" omnivores that paper does cover, eudromaeosaurs were raptorial hypercarnivores (See the 1st Bakker quote AWA page 6 in this link: https://books.google.com/books?id=hTTUBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA6&dq=%22stork-like+than+raptorial%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiz4LzOtbDWAhUGOiYKHSyHD5MQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q=%22stork-like%20than%20raptorial%22&f=false ).
-It focuses on teeth, yet ignores the fact that "juvenile teeth display the same features as those of adults, but on a smaller scale" ( https://www.academia.edu/1974330/SWEETMAN_S._C._2004._The_first_record_of_velociraptorine_dinosaurs_Saurischia_Theropoda_from_the_Wealden_Early_Cretaceous_Barremian_of_southern_England._Cretaceous_Research_25_353-364 ), which means "that hatchlings were feeding on prey tissue of the same general texture and consistency as that fed upon by adults" (See the 2nd Bakker quote).

Quoting Bakker (See "Raptor Red"): "Female dominance is a powerful piece of evidence that permits us to reconstruct the private lives of Cretaceous predatory dinosaurs. A family structure built around a large female is rare in meat-eating reptiles and mammals today, but it's the rule for one category of predatory species...carnivorous birds. Owls, hawks, and eagles have societies organized around female dominance, and we can think of tyrannosaurs and raptors as giant, ground-running eagles."

Quoting Bakker (See Wolberg's "Dinofest International: Proceedings of a Symposium Sponsored By Arizona State University", page 62): "A striking difference exists in modern communities between cold-blooded predators and hot-blooded predators. Most bird and mammal species feed their young until the youngsters are almost full size; then and only then do the young set out to hunt on their own. Consequently, the very young mammals and birds do not chose food items independently of the parents. Young lions and eagles feed on parts of carcasses from relatively large prey killed by the parents. Most snakes, lizards, and turtles do not feed the young after birth, and the new-born reptiles must find prey suitably diminutive to fit the size of the baby reptilian jaws and teeth. A single individual lizard during its lifetime usually feeds over a much wider size range of prey than a single individual weasel or hawk, because the lizard begins its life hunting independently.
Therefore, a predatory guild of three lizard species with adult weights 10g, 100g and 1000g would require a much wider range of prey size than a guild of three mammal predator species with the same adult weights. If allosaurs had a lizard-like parental behavior, then each individual allosaur would require a wide size range in prey as it grew up. The evidence of the Como lair sites strongly suggests that the dinosaur predatory guild was constructed more like that of hot-blooded carnivores than that of lizards or snakes.
This theory receives support from the shape of the baby allosaur teeth. In many cold-blooded reptilian predators today, the crown shape in the very young is quite different from the adult crown shape. For example, hatchling alligators have the same number of tooth sockets in each jaw as do the adults, but the hatchling crowns are very much sharper and more delicate. In the hatchling all the teeth are nearly the same shape, and the young gators have less differentiation of crown size and shape along the tooth row; the hatchlings lack the massive, projecting canine teeth and the very broad, acorn-shaped posterior crowns of the adults. Young gators feed extensively on water insects, and the sharp crowns are designed for such insectivorous habits. Adult gator species use their canine teeth for killing large prey, such as deer, and employ the acorn crowns to crush large water snails and turtles (Chabreck, 1971; Delaney and Abercrombie, 1986; McNease and Joanen, 1977; Web et al, 1987).
If allosaur hatchlings fed independent of adults, I would not expect the hatchling tooth crowns to be the same over-all shape as that of the adult. However, the over-all tooth crown shape in the tiniest allosaur IS identical to that of the adult (figs. 3,4). Thus it appears that hatchlings were feeding on prey tissue of the same general texture and consistency as that fed upon by adults."

**In reference to not living in packs: It ignores the best evidence for pack-hunting in Deinonychus (I.e. Shed teeth in general & MOR 682 in particular; See the Maxwell quote) despite having cited Maxwell & Ostrom 1995 ( https://sci-hub.st/https://www.jstor.org/stable/4523664 ). In other words, Deinonychus pack-hunting probably looked something like this: https://softdinosaurs.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/antlers-formationwtmk.jpg

Quoting Maxwell ( https://www.naturalhistorymag.com/htmlsite/master.html?https://www.naturalhistorymag.com/htmlsite/1299/1299_feature.html ): "Nobody knows for certain what took place at the Shrine site. We do know, however, that whether hunted down and killed by a pack or simply scavenged after death, Tenontosaurus was the preferred food of Deinonychus. Approximately eighty occurrences of Tenontosaurus remains have been discovered in the Cloverly formation to date, and thirty-five include Deinonychus teeth. While Deinonychus fossils are rarely found with other possible prey animals, three or four Deinonychus teeth typically turn up wherever there are Tenontosaurus remains. And at a site discovered in the Cloverly formation in 1992, there were even more.

Laid out in its death pose at this new site was a beautifully preserved, near-complete specimen of a young Tenontosaurus. Four Deinonychus teeth were found alongside the bones; later, in the laboratory, seven more teeth were uncovered. It's possible that a few more teeth were missed in the field or unwittingly discarded during preparation because they were concealed within small lumps of rock. So we have a subadult Tenontosaurus no more than fourteen feet long (compared with a length of about twenty feet for the adult at the Shrine site), preserved with at least eleven Deinonychus teeth.

But how can we distinguish between the remains of a victim hunted down and devoured by a pack and an animal that simply died and was scavenged by a few passing Deinonychus? As is the case at the Shrine site, this Tenontosaurus was preserved where it died. After death, the desiccation of the abundant supporting tendons that line the vertebrae of the neck and tail cause these parts to coil. The tail of Tenontosaurus, which accounts for about one-third of the animal's total length, is particularly heavy with supporting tendons. In this specimen, the pronounced curvature of the tail and the neck toward each other effectively counters any claim that the bones were carried to the site by water currents. The Deinonychus teeth were found in the region of the abdomen and pelvis, suggesting that the predators lost their teeth while feeding on the viscera. Most modern carnivores begin with the areas around the anus and abdomen when they feast on freshly killed prey, and it's likely that carnivorous dinosaurs did the same.

The number of teeth indicate that more than one Deinonychus was involved with the carcass. Like all other theropod dinosaurs, Deinonychus shed and replaced teeth throughout its life. The teeth would fall out upon the animal's reaching maturity but also could be wrenched out earlier by the stress associated with the biting and tearing of flesh. Because of this, theropod teeth are very common in sediments containing dinosaur fossils. The teeth from this site vary from recently erupted to fully mature ones. Given that Deinonychus had only sixty teeth in its jaws at any one time, it's unlikely that all eleven were wrenched from the mouth of just one feeding animal. This would leave the Deinonychus toothless after five similar meals. The possibility that Deinonychus was replacing shed teeth in a few weeks or months, and therefore had the ability to sustain such dramatic tooth loss, was quashed by Greg Erickson, who, as a master's degree student at the Museum of the Rockies, worked on replacement rates of teeth in various dinosaurs and living reptiles. After CT-scanning portions of the lower jaw of Deinonychus and studying individual teeth, he came up with an estimate of 300 days for the time it took Deinonychus to replace a shed tooth with a mature one.

We know that this Tenontosaurus was not yet an adult, so it didn't die of old age. Of course, this doesn't rule out death from disease or injury and doesn't confirm that it was cut down by a pack, but it's a start. Next, we have a concentration of teeth around the abdomen and pelvis. This may indicate that the pack fed on the abdominal contents while they were still warm and moist. If, after the viscera had been consumed, the remainder of the carcass was scavenged over time by many individuals, we would expect a much more disturbed carcass and a wider scattering of teeth. Similarly, if the Tenontosaurus had been killed by a larger predator-such as the unknown owner of the three-inch-long serrated teeth that occasionally crop up in the Cloverly formation—then whatever remained of the carcass would have been strewn around the area."
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: Good, semi-good, & bad dino sources
JD-man

Replies: 5
Views: 2542

Search in: The Museum   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: Good, semi-good, & bad dino sources    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeMon Jun 03, 2019 7:39 am
I originally posted the following at deviantART (Part 4: https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-Good-Semi-good-and-Bad-Dino-Sources-4-800236863 ). I encourage you to make your own list of good, semi-good, & bad dino sources. It doesn't have to be the same format or include the same sources.

Quote :
Hi everybody,

I was originally planning on "Good, semi-good, and bad dino sources 3" being the last part in the series ( https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-Good-semi-good-and-bad-dino-sources-3-632615112 ). However, I've since learned more about some of the already-listed sources & others.

Cheers,
Herman Diaz

Good

Remember what I said about the AMNH (See "Good": https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-Good-semi-good-and-bad-dino-sources-3-632615112 )? The same goes for the Smithsonian ("Smithsonian Institution: Smithsonian Homepage": https://www.si.edu/ ). "The museum's new Deep Time Hall" ( http://dino-sours.tumblr.com/post/170584157882/10-things-im-excited-for-in-the-new-national ) & the book based on it ( https://www.amazon.com/Smithsonian-Dinosaurs-Other-Amazing-Creatures-ebook/dp/B07H1XJTJB ) are especially good examples of that.

Remember what I said about Gardom/Milner's "The Natural History Museum Book of Dinosaurs" (See "Good": https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-Good-semi-good-and-bad-dino-sources-1-351589315 )? Naish/Barrett's "Dinosaurs: How They Lived and Evolved" does everything Gardom/Milner's book does, but mostly bigger & better (See books #2 & #1 for what I mean: https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-Top-4-natural-histories-of-dinos-758236511 ).

Remember what I said about "Prehistoric Beast of the Week" & "Paleoaerie" (See "Good": https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-Good-semi-good-and-bad-dino-sources-3-632615112 )? The same mostly goes for "Palaeos, la historia de la Vida en la Tierra" ( http://palaeos-blog.blogspot.com/ ). Put another way, the latter is more-or-less to Mexico what the former are to NJ & AR, respectively.

Remember what I said about Witton (See "Good": https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-Good-semi-good-and-bad-dino-sources-3-632615112 )? Apparently, I didn't say enough. My bad. Given the combination of his paleoart influence ( https://chasmosaurs.blogspot.com/2017/12/the-great-2017-palaeoart-survey-some.html ), his paleoart books ( https://iupress.org/9780253048110/life-through-the-ages-ii/ ), & his recent paleoart ( http://markwitton-com.blogspot.com/2018/02/a-mural-for-dippy-restoring-celebrity.html ), he's basically the modern day Charles R. Knight.

Semi-good

Remember what I said about Benton & Brusatte (See "Semi-good": https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-Good-semi-good-and-bad-dino-sources-2-454991435 )? Norman ("Dr David Norman — Department of Earth Sciences": https://www.esc.cam.ac.uk/directory/david-norman ) is similar, but more layered:
-On the 1 hand, he's a consistently good source for the specialist. His ornithopod work is especially notable (E.g. To quote Witton, "For an easy to access, relatively up to date and inexpensive look at a bunch of iguanodonts, you could do a lot worse than checking out Dave Norman's chapter on ornithopods in English Wealden Fossils": http://markwitton-com.blogspot.com/2014/01/remembering-iguanodon.html ).*
-On the other hand, he's a not-so-consistent source for casual readers/the enthusiast. Yes, "When Dinosaurs Ruled the Earth" & "Dinosaur!" are both great & I reviewed the former as such ( https://www.amazon.com/review/RJ6H99FGIW6CC/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ). However, a lot of his other popular work is just OK for reasons discussed in said review AWA his overly-conservative attitude.
-1 especially good example of that is his "Ask the Expert" column in "Dinosaurs!" magazine ( https://chasmosaurs.blogspot.com/2012/01/vintage-dinosaur-art-yet-more-dinosaurs.html ): For 1, compare his T.rex answer to "Mythical Match" (which is from the 1971 book, "Animal Ghosts": http://agathaumas.blogspot.com/2011/10/antropocentrismo-e-paleoillustrazione.html ); For another, compare his "feather theory" answer to the Gardom/Milner quote (which is from the 1993 edition of "The Natural History Museum Book of Dinosaurs").
-Another especially good example is his review of Bakker's "Raptor Red" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raptor_Red#Reception ) & how it reminds me of the "nature fakers controversy" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_fakers_controversy ): On the 1 hand, I agree w/Burroughs about unverified claims being presented as facts; On the other hand, Burroughs comes off as blindly dismissive of the possibility that animals are more than just automatons; In reference to the latter, I think Seton was especially good at showing that "animals are creatures with wants and feelings differing in degree only from our own" ( http://www.mainlesson.com/display.php?author=seton&book=wild&story=_front ); You could argue that Seton ultimately won the debate given that "his contributions to natural history included pioneering work in what would become the sciences of ecology and ethology" (which backed up a lot of what he said: https://books.google.com/books?id=RWQH8iSDQhEC&pg=PR7&dq=%22seton+may+be+best%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjN_cXk7IjaAhUET98KHcSEAFUQ6AEIKTAA#v=onepage&q=%22seton%20may%20be%20best%22&f=false ). Similarly, Norman comes off as blindly dismissive of Bakker's book (which, contra what Norman says, helps kids demonstrate "an increased level of scientific literacy": https://scholarworks.montana.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1/975/BrockbankB0811.pdf ).

*I'm specifically referring to his 1980s Iguanodon work (which reminds me of Dollo's 1880s Iguanodon work in terms of changing our views of how Iguanodon looked & behaved).

Quoting Gardom/Milner: "Why feathers? It is generally agreed that birds evolved from small meat-eating theropod dinosaurs. Obviously these dinosaurs did not sprout feathers overnight and become birds, so there must have been a long period when some of the small theropods were experimenting with feathers, which are only a different version of scales."

Bad

As you may remember from my Riddle review ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R47I7QPHDIHYD/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ), BANDits are basically the paleo equivalent of creationists & global warming deniers ( https://dinosaurpalaeo.wordpress.com/2011/10/08/banditry-creationism-and-global-warming-denial/ ). Similarly, Ford ("Brian J Ford scientific home page") is basically the paleo equivalent of a flat earther. Ford's dino work is so bad that 1) NHBS sold it w/a Surgeon General-esque warning ("The aquatic dinosaur hypothesis of Ford, who is not himself a palaeontologist, is considered controversial in palaeontological circles and generally not taken seriously, being at odds with a large body of evidence. Interested readers might also want to have a look at the pieces written by palaeontologists Brian Switek for Smithsonian.com, and Darren Naish for Scientific American": https://web.archive.org/web/20200414054944/https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/32889419_2140433812638940_8186025074231345152_n.jpg?_nc_cat=106&_nc_sid=ca434c&_nc_ohc=IllaPB6vYTUAX9Pot_l&_nc_ht=scontent-sea1-1.xx&oh=6e5c69eb39f38cdf049a3d4b1c42930a&oe=5EBC326E ), & 2) Naish has had to dissect it 3 separate times (which are as follows):
-"Palaeontology bites back…": https://darrennaish.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/naish-2012-labnews-response-to-ford-aquatic-dinosaurs.pdf
-"Brian J. Ford's Aquatic Dinosaurs, 2014 Edition": https://web.archive.org/web/20180422065207/https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/tetrapod-zoology/brian-j-ford-s-aquatic-dinosaurs-2014-edition/
-"A Vast Quantity of Evidence Confirms That Non-Bird Dinosaurs Were Not Aquatic": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jG50CGJJfUs

Remember what I said about Gwawinapterus/Johnfaa (See "Bad": https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-Good-semi-good-and-bad-dino-sources-1-351589315 )? Apparently, I didn't say enough. My bad. For 1, his real name is Carlos Miguel Albuquerque & he has since moved his "Gwawinapterus | Prehistoric esoterism" content to "Ichthyoconodon – Prehistoric esoterism". For another, he's since been permabanned from both Wikipedia  (as Falconfly: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=prev&oldid=868840663&fbclid=IwAR0cqwNa_ZkFJEDHs6VF71y9sd2DRJRxraMGwLk7az_8XeGUceUnaWi6Eo4#User:Falconfly ) & the Tetrapod Zoology group (See the Naish quote).

Quoting Naish ( https://www.facebook.com/groups/156954631577624/permalink/318195005453585/?comment_id=318639152075837&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R%22%7D ): "Hi everyone. A load of drama has happened in my few days of absence from this group. I can't make any sense of what's happened nor do I understand what the source of argument is. But one person here has been accused of bullying, of sending vindictive personal messages, and of displaying an attitude that is very contrary to the group-minded, co-operative discussions I most want to see here. I have therefore decided to remove that person from the group and I would advise other parties involved not to engage further via DM or whatever."
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: FCM Revivial
Megaspino2

Replies: 45
Views: 5131

Search in: JP: Operation Genesis   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: FCM Revivial    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeSat Jan 26, 2019 9:14 pm
Dinonerd343 wrote:
I have 3 questions to ask you Megaspino:

#1: Will the there still be dinosaurs from the old FCM HD mod like the Herrerasaurus and the Troodon ?

#2: Will this mod will be on moddb and will it be relased sometime in 2019 ?

#3: Will the Mamenchisaurus will be in the mod ?



The old dinosaurs will be in, no JW dinosaurs though.

I'm actually planning on putting it on Moddb once I have some more pictures since you need at least 5 pictures to post your mod and I don't want to be the guy who posts the same picture over and over to reach the limit Razz.

Mamenchi will be in the mod; it's a perfect candidate since we can edit models and animations now. This means the animations won't be so janky (the old one had very strange things happen with the neck when it bent).

Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: FCM Revivial
Dinonerd343

Replies: 45
Views: 5131

Search in: JP: Operation Genesis   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: FCM Revivial    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeSat Jan 26, 2019 8:45 pm
I have 3 questions to ask you Megaspino:

#1: Will the there still be dinosaurs from the old FCM HD mod like the Herrerasaurus and the Troodon ?

#2: Will this mod will be on moddb and will it be relased sometime in 2019 ?

#3: Will the Mamenchisaurus will be in the mod ?
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: My Dinosaur Ecosystems experience
JD-man

Replies: 0
Views: 730

Search in: The Museum   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: My Dinosaur Ecosystems experience    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeWed Dec 05, 2018 12:22 am
I originally posted the following at deviantART ( https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/SD-My-Dinosaur-Ecosystems-experience-775311804 ).

Quote :


Hi everybody!

On 11/16/18, I received my verified certificate for passing the "Dinosaur Ecosystems" course (100%: http://web.archive.org/web/20210308211959/https://courses.edx.org/certificates/7823ca7a3c09495a8294127095f5b1ce ). I enrolled in the course partly b/c of Paleoaerie's recommendation ( https://paleoaerie.org/2018/09/14/national-online-learning-day/?fbclid=IwAR2VnWO0rjLiZey8oxqznDzl6U-tUqzTs9gxaKM7aCDp5sK5-8l1ToK7_kk ), & partly to prepare myself for volunteering at a local dino museum (I think it'll help me be a better natural history interpreter). This journal entry is a modified version of my course review. 1 more thing of note: Before starting the course, I felt like Solrac in "SOLRACUEST" (See 2:30-3:00: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMJhATayEb4&t=1s ); After receiving my certificate, I felt like Homer in "The Simpsons - I Am So Smart" ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ls5BFzuxGw4 ).

Cheers,
Herman Diaz

Trying to review this course

I'm usually not very good at reviewing things in the moment, but I'll try.

What I liked: Almost everything about this course, especially how thorough it was (even more so than some books I've read in terms reconstructing a dino ecosystem as completely as possible), how concise each video was (which made it easier for me to focus on learning the topic at hand & re-watch the video multiple times for good measure), the use of images in each video (which made the video less static for me & helped me better understand what the ppl were talking about), the inclusion of transcripts & CC (which gave me the option of reading & listening at the same time AWA helped me better understand the ppl w/thick accents), & the practice questions (which helped me better understand why the correct answers were correct).

What I didn't like: I previously mentioned a few things that were mislabeled or presented not-so-well...but those are easy fixes. The only 2 things I didn't like that might be not-so-easy fixes were 1) Brusatte's Week 2 video being hard to take seriously, & 2) Weeks 5-6 having too much content for that amount of time. In reference to #1, I previously mentioned the weird factual errors in Brusatte's popular work in general & said video in particular...The other problem w/said video is Brusatte's presentation (which was less like that of the credible expert I know he is & more like that of a George Blasing-esque dork: http://web.archive.org/web/20150906025457/https://tyrantisterror.deviantart.com/art/Jurassic-Fight-Club-Formula-136354754 ). More specifically, his voice got high & giggly several times throughout said video, as if he was trying not to bust out laughing for some reason. I get that Brusatte's excited to talk about his professional interests, but so are Dr. Pittman & the other course experts, yet they had no trouble showing that while also being dignified. In reference to #2, this course should've been 8 weeks long w/Weeks 5-6 being Weeks 5-8. In Weeks 1-4, I was able to spread the content out over 1 week & focus on (re-)watching 1 video per day without taking time out of my busy schedule. In Weeks 5-6, however, there was so much content that I had to stay up later every day & (re-)watch multiple videos on a given day.

Overall, 8 or 9/10, highly recommended to anyone w/an interest in dinos, especially non-expert dino fans like me.
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!
JD-man

Replies: 85
Views: 9922

Search in: Dinosaur Jungles   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeWed Nov 14, 2018 12:42 am
My 52nd review for this thread is a negative 1 for Brooklyn's If You Were Raised by a Dinosaur. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Helpful" votes it can get because it's outnumbered by opposing reviews (which don't give a good idea of what to expect: https://www.charlesbridge.com/products/if-you-were-raised-by-a-dinosaur ). Many thanks in advance.

The worst popular baby dino book ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R2PBFKZ4BOZCNN/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ): 1/5

Short version: If you want the best baby dino book for older kids, get Zoehfeld's Dinosaur Parents, Dinosaur Young: Uncovering the Mystery of Dinosaur Families & read it in conjunction with other, more recent books (E.g. Holtz's Dinosaurs in general & Chapter 36 in particular). Brooklyn's If You Were Raised by a Dinosaur (henceforth You) may be the worst. It just goes to show what a difference some expert consulting & personal research can make.

Long version: Read on.

Many popular baby dino books are OK, but not great. There are 3 main reasons for why I think that is: 1) They're mixed bags in terms of paleoart (Quoting Miller: "I bought the book expecting a more technical discussion of the animals discussed therein...but was surprised to find beautiful paintings of questionably-restored dinosaurs"); 2) They're confusing messes in terms of organization; 3) They fail to cover many baby dino-related subjects & those that are covered are done so in an insufficient manner (I.e. Sometimes, they simplify things to the point of being meaningless; Other times, they're just plain wrong). In this review, I focus on reasons #1 & #3 & why I think they make You the worst popular baby dino book.

1) Not only is You's paleoart very questionable, but also very ugly. More specifically, it consists of cheap-looking paper collages of anachronistic assemblages of mostly gray/green/brown animals with wonky anatomy in inappropriate environments: In reference to "anachronistic assemblages", see the cover; There's a generic rhamphorhynchid pterosaur, a Massospondylus family, an Apatosaurus family, & a T.rex family; In reference to "wonky anatomy", see "Review update #52 (It's a big 1)!" for everything wrong with the cover in terms of anatomy ( https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/Review-update-52-It-s-a-big-1-772428585 ); In reference to "inappropriate environments", the cover depicts a grassland environment despite the fact that, to quote Holtz ( https://www.geol.umd.edu/~tholtz/G104/lectures/104shadow.html ), "grasses seem to have been relatively rare in the Mesozoic, and did not form grasslands until much later. Ground cover in the later Mesozoic was a mixture of ferns and herbaceous angiosperms. So as far as we know, no dinosaur other than birds ever wandered in prairies or savannahs".

3A) In reference to "Sometimes", You's writing is overcomplicated (as opposed to oversimplified). More specifically, it's like when "Chandler and Monica ask Joey to write a recommendation letter for them to the adoption agency. To sound smart, Joey uses a thesaurus [on every word]" ( https://globalnews.ca/news/315234/friends-sitcom-helps-esl-community-learn-english/ ). The Brooklyn quote in "Review update #52 (It's a big 1)!" is the best example of that ( https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/Review-update-52-It-s-a-big-1-772428585 ): For 1, it's also the best example of incorrectly pluralized dino names (Seriously, "T. rexes"?); For another, it shamelessly rips off Chapter 17 of Holtz's Dinosaurs.

3B) In reference to "Other times", this is especially apparent in the Brooklyn quote below (which fails on so many levels that I need to quote the UCMP just to demonstrate): It fails to understand that Geist/Jones are 1) not dino experts, & 2) known for "publishing with a hidden agenda" ( http://web.archive.org/web/20171216234814/http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2009/07/17/birds-cannot-be-dinosaurs/ ); It fails to understand "modern-day [precocial] birds and alligators", most of which DO need parental care, including most of those in Geist/Jones's study; It fails to understand Maiasaura (which, to paraphrase Anthony J. Martin, "is arguably the best understood of nesting dinosaurs, only rivaled by its neighbors in the same field area, [Troodon]"); It fails to understand that Geist/Jones's study was at least 9 years out of date at the time of You's publication.

1 more thing of note: To quote Dussart (See Biosciences on the Internet: A Student's Guide), "The speed and ease of email, plus its association with the web, mean that it is relatively easy to find and contact experts"; Thus, there's no excuse for You to not have expert consulting, especially given that some experts make a living from consultancy (E.g. Darren Naish: https://darrennaish.wordpress.com/ ); At the very least, having it would've helped prevent many of the textual fails (if not the visual ones too); In fact, said fails are so basic that they could've easily been avoided with up-to-date personal research; Unfortunately, there's very little of said research in You & it's mostly used incorrectly; In contrast, Sattler's Tyrannosaurus Rex and Its Kin: The Mesozoic Monsters shows how good a non-authoritative book can be with a lot of said research ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R3INFL96O3PWAS/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8 ).

Quoting Brooklyn:
Quote :
Not all scientists agree with the interpretation that Maiasaura babies needed parental care. Scientists Nicholas Geist and Terry Jones examined the hip and knee bones of different birds and alligators. They compared the hip bones and knee joints of Maiasaura to that of modern-day birds and alligators, which don't need parental care. The Maiasaura hips were at least as well developed as the birds', and the knee joints were no weaker than the birds' or alligators'. This might mean that Maiasaura babies did not need care from their parents as Horner believed.


Quoting the UCMP ( http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/science/eggshell/eggshell_case1.php ):
Quote :
In their original description of embryonic remains from the Willow Creek Anticline, Horner and Weishampel (1988) cited degree of ossification of the leg bones of Maiasaura and Troodon (then thought to be Orodromeus) to indicate the level of mobility of young after hatching. Subsequently, Geist and Jones (1996) compared extant perinatal (the developmental stage immediately prior to and following hatching) birds and crocodilians to fossil dinosaur embryos and hatchlings. They found that the extent of hip bone development was more important than leg bone development for recognizing precocial versus altricial hatchlings, and that the leg bones of Maiasaura, Troodon, and other dinosaurs did not reliably indicate the mobility of a hatchling. Geist and Jones suggested that the hatchling dinosaurs studied were likely precocial upon birth, although this does not preclude the provision of extended parental care. Horner et al. (2001) countered Geist and Jones' (1996) argument after an extensive histological analysis of turtle, crocodilian, non-avian dinosaur, and bird embryonic and perinatal bones that compared bone developmental patterns and growth rates. The authors correlated ossification and growth rates with life-history strategies. Horner et al. (2001) concluded that developmental differences (including growth rates) in embryonic and perinatal dinosaur bones from the Willow Creek Anticline indicate a precocial lifestyle for Troodon and Orodromeus hatchlings and an altricial lifestyle for hadrosaur hatchlings that necessitated parental care; this work supported their original hypothesis (Horner and Weishampel 1988).
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: Exploring Jurassic Park's weirdest script draft
Mr. Robustus

Replies: 4
Views: 2861

Search in: Film Universe   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: Exploring Jurassic Park's weirdest script draft    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeMon Aug 27, 2018 1:36 pm
So, I've recently been reading some of the Jurassic Park's scripts, and one in particular caught my attention. It's the march 1992 draft, written by Malia Scotch Marmo (apparently there was also involvement by Crichton himself), that was after the first Michael Crichton draft and before the final David Koepp drafts. There's a lot of concept art for this draft floating around the internet. It's... kind of schlocky, to be honest. There's some really silly dialogue and it reads too much like a B-movie. But I found kind of fascinating to think that this could be the Jurassic Park movie that we got, and started writing down some of the things I found interesting. You can find it here, if you're interested.

Let me get the most interesting stuff out of the way first:

- The first time a dinosaur appears on the flesh is only fairly late into the script, on the jeep tour ride itself. No "Welcome to Jurassic Park" scene here. We are actually TOLD that the Park houses living dinosaurs and how they were made waaaay before we actually see one. There isn't even a hatchling waiting for them in the hatchery or anything.
- On a similar note, Hammond himself only appears in the Visitor Center during the tour ride. Gennaro is the one that picks Alan and Ellie on the dig site.
- Remember that exciting sequence from the novel where the T. rex chases Grant and the kids on their raft through the river? Spielberg has been quoted saying that early during pre-production that it was one of the first sequences he scrapped, because it would be too complicated to recreate. Well, that sequence is present on this draft, but there's a catch: there's no T. rex. Or any other dinosaur, for that matter. Instead, it's just a whole sequence of Grant and the kids looking for a raft on the maintenance shed, finding it, and descending the river while fighting... rapids.
- Nedry isn't stealing dinosaur embryos in this version... he's stealing dinosaur EGGS (he uses a portable incubator instead of a barbasol can). And what's more, he actually makes it to the boat and delivers them! The boat's captain is in on the whole theft, and is actually waiting personally for Nedry to arrive. And the visitors witness the whole smuggling business from afar. Remember that ticking clock subplot from the novel where the visitors need to get the phones working so they can stop the boat before it reaches the mainland? This is basically an adaptation from that, with the difference being that they are trying to stop a smuggling operation instead of stopping two juvenile Velociraptors from reaching the mainland.
- As they're leaving in the rescue chopper, Hammond outright refuses to go with them, ignoring Grant's protests. Instead, he stubbornly walks back into the jungle, and his parting words to Grant is that he'll "amount to nothing", and he'll "be a bone-brusher for the rest of his life".
- After that, the group has a final face-off with the T. rex as it tries to attack the helicopter. Until then, the T. rex was totally absent from the third act. The last time we saw it was after it took down a juvenile hadrosaur.
- Finally, the most interesting aspect: remember that sick Triceratops? They never do find out what's wrong with it in the movie we got, but we know from the comic adaptation, the novel and the final script that the reason it got sick was that, whenever it swallowed gizzard stones, it swallowed some poison berries accidentally. In this draft, the protagonists also come to this conclusion... at first, that is. Later that night, after the T. rex has broke out, Ellie goes to one of the laboratories to analyse a tissue sample from the Triceratops ("Freda", as she is called here) under the microscope, and we learn that the mysterious disease is also affecting the other animals. Grant even notices the same tiny bumps on the tongue of a hadrosaur when he's making his way back to the Visitor Center with the two kids. The answer to the mystery? Ellie finds out from looking at X-Rays of the Triceratops bones that all the dinosaurs from Jurassic Park aren't adults, but instead juveniles pumped with growth hormones. The reason for this (explained by Hammond himself) is that there's a problem with the cloning process that causes the cloned dinosaurs to die very young, and the Park is on a deadline, so "Wu uses growth hormones to achieve the desired size in a short amount of time". Hammond also reveals to Ellie that the main reason he invited her and Alan over is so that, once the tour survey was over, they could help him figure out how to solve that. Naturally, they don't. Everyone just leaves and the implication is that the dinosaurs will all die out.

Characters omissions:

- Probably the biggest character omission here: there's no Ian Malcolm on this draft. Instead, his roles are given to both Grant and Gennaro. Grant is the one constantly at odds and getting into moral discussions with Hammond, and they don't see eye-to-eye. On the other hand, Gennaro is the one accompanying Grant and Sattler on the tour vehicles, and he's the one that gets injured by the T. rex and that later spends the rest of the time high on morphine. This change actually kind of works, but the script ends up missing on a good comic relief (we're basically stuck with Nedry and Lex)
- Oddly enough, there is no Dodgson here (see what I did there it's like a pun). Instead, he's replaced by a character named Bill Baker... that serves pretty much the same purpose, to a point where I was asking myself why did they even change the name. Also, he meets with Nedry on his company's headquarters instead of San Jose.

Jurassic World and Fallen Kingdom déjà vu's:

- Lex rides a baby Triceratops. This was later referenced in the lawsuit-waiting-to-happen Gentle Giants scene from Jurassic World.
- This draft constantly mentions a Dilophosaurus umbrella being sold on the gift shop. While it doesn't happen on this draft, there's a concept art showing Tim and Lex using that umbrella to fend off a Raptor (here). That might have influenced the scene in Jurassic World where Gray activates a Dilo hologram to distract Delta.
- After Ellie tries to reboot energy in the generator, she runs back to the fence surrounding Hammond's quarters with a Raptor hot in pursuit. Muldoon leaves the gate half-shut for Ellie, and she rolls through it. Muldoon shuts the gate just in time before the Raptor can get inside, and the Raptor gets stuck in the bars of the gate. The scene where Owen holds off Blue, Charlie and Delta and rolls through the closing gate before they can pounce on him is reminiscent of this.
- At one point, Ellie enter Hammond's quarters, and there's a large model of the park with plastic dinosaurs. She even briefly picks up the plastic T. rex like Maisie did in an unused scene.
- The T. rex reveal is mostly done by the storm's lightning. Four movies later, Bayona would use the same visual artifice for the T. rex reveal in Fallen Kingdom's prologue.
- There's also the raptor-type dinosaur being killed in the climax by the head of a dinosaur skeleton in a display.

Direct similarities with the novel that didn't carry over to the final script:

- Gennaro is young and athletic. Also, he plays a major role, like in the novel.
- Grant likes kids.
- Tim is older than Lex, and Lex likes baseball and is an insufferable brat.
- Nedry accompanies Grant, Sattler and Gennaro on the helicopter to the island.
- Grant and the kids are woken in the tree by a hadrosaur instead of a Brachiosaurus.
- The stampede scene involves a group of hadrosaurs, not Gallimimus (although the latter are still present here).
- Muldoon actually discovers Nedry's dead body.
- Lex makes friends with a baby Trike.
- Hammond is an asshole, and he dies (or at least it's implied) in the end.
- Both Harding and Wu stay on the island, and Wu is killed by one of the raptors.
- Muldoon survives. Yay!
- Ed Regis is here, accompanying Tim and Lex. Like in the novel, he abandons them during the T. rex breakout, and is later killed by the T. rex (only it's the adult instead of the juvenile).
- The Dilophosaurus is as big as the actual animal, like in the novel. As a bonus, they are already described as having the Chlamydosaurus-esque frill.
- Hammond mentions to Gennaro that they are gonna make a miniature pet Triceratops, like Dodgson hypothesized during the BioSyn boardroom meeting in the novel.
- Grant has his showdown with the Raptors on the hatchery here. The difference is that there's only one Raptor, instead of three. Booo.
- Lex makes friends with a juvenile Triceratops, and actually rides it, like she wanted to do in the novel.

Assorted musings:

- The opening scene is - like the first trailer - a microscopic view of a mosquito in amber being drilled for dinosaur DNA. After that, we cut to the dig site. There's no scene of a Velociraptor being unloaded into its pen.
- There's a whole scene in Gennaro's law office where he and his boss discuss his upcoming inspection of the park. It's... kind of redundant.
- Nedry is incredibly obnoxious in this. Like, much more than in the actual movie, almost like a Jar Jar Binks.
- The tour goes like this: Brachiosaurus > Gallimimus > Dilophosaurus > Triceratops > T. rex
- The "T. rex can only see movement" rule is kind of all over the place here. It's never brought up, other than Grant telling Gennaro and Tim "don't move" when the T. rex breaks out, and then when they see the T. rex attacking Ed Regis, Grant says this: "It's Regis and the Rex is after him.  But it's okay.  Regis knows the Rex can't see him.  Evidently, he can only see movement.  Regis'll be ok if he stays still".
- Ed Regis tries to appeal to the T. rex's good side. It was already silly in the novel, where he did that to a juvenile, but here he tries to do that to an adult T. rex. Also, Grant just kind of watches from a distance with the kids as Regis is comically killed off. He doesn't even try to intervene, or to shield the kids eyes.
- Apparently there are flamingos in the herbivore enclosure. John Hammond really was keen on destroying that leased island's ecosystem in every way possible.
- As aforementioned, there's a scene where Lex finds a baby Triceratops and rides it for a while like a horse. Maybe it's the cynical adult in me, but I'm glad this scene didn't make it into the final movie. The way it's described makes it sound way too whimsical and kid-friendly for my taste. On a different note, it got me wondering how the hell they expected to pull a scene like that off back in 1992.
- There's a recurring motif of mosquitoes buzzing around the characters at certain moments. After the visitors leave to resume their tour, a mosquito buzzes around the sick Triceratops before being smashed by its tail. A mosquito buzzes around Grant as he sleeps on the tree with the kids before being swatted away. Finally, on the second-to-last scene, a mosquito lands on the hand of a dying John Hammond. Poetic justice, I guess.
- Hammond has a sort of 'throne' in the Control Room from where he watches the tour ride. It sounds pretty stupid.
- Instead of an Alamosaurus, the display in the rotunda shows a Velociraptor skeleton fighting a T. rex. Strangely, this draft alludes this encounter numerous times without ever actually showing it in the flesh. There's the display in the rotunda, the climax in which Grant uses the T. rex bones to kill the final raptor, and during the early dig site scene, Ellie mentions that type of encounter (even though neither Velociraptor nor Deinonychus coexisted with T. rex). It's a wonder that it took so long for Spielberg to have the insight to include that fight in the actual movie.
- I'm not sure if Alan and Ellie are supposed to be an item in this. For the most part, it just seems like their relationship is purely platonic, but there's a part where they gaze into each other eyes for a while during the Brachiosaurus scene, and in the end, Grant puts his arm around her when they are escaping in the helicopter, and she pulls it closer.
- For some reason, there's a short scene of Muldoon and Ellie manually moving a fallen tree out of the road. That's it.
- Muldoon essentially leaves Wu for dead. Wu is running towards Hammond's quarters while being chased by a Raptor, and Muldoon closes the door on Wu's face so the Raptor won't get in. He and Ellie only hear Wu's screams from the other side. Jesus, that's really mean-spirited.
- At one point, Lex and Tim are cornered by a Raptor inside the Visitor Center's gift shop. There's a whole sequence where they defend themselves by throwing lots and lots of toys on it, and then make a run to the kitchen. It sounds really silly, almost home alone-esque.
- Muldoon is described as having a constant limp.
- Instead of a max-security fence, the raptors are enclosed in a pit whose opening is covered with wire mesh.
- There are five Raptors. There's no mention of a leader. Here's the death tally:
  Raptor #1: exploded by Muldoon's rocket launcher.
  Raptor #2: locked into freezer by Tim and Lex.
  Raptor #3: killed after eating poisoned egg.
  Raptor #4: gets electrocuted by the electrified bars of Hammond's quarters when Tim gets the power back on the Control Room.
  Raptor #5: squashed by the fallen head of the skeleton T. rex in the rotunda.
- As the main characters are getting aboard the rescue chopper, Hammond mentions they got a batch of Iguanodon eggs due to hatch on Tuesday when trying to convince them to stay. Too bad the park is already chapter 11.
- The final shot of the movie is the survivor's helicopter descending on the cargo ship that was trying to smuggle the dinosaur eggs. I'm not sure what that's supposed to imply, especially considering Grant already convinced it to turn around back to Nublar when he was with the kids on the Control Room.

Some descriptions I found funny:

- "It's A RAPTOR, lean and ferocious.  More like a cyborg than a hunter, it studies the kids from just outside the gift shop entrance. " what
- "The raptor stops gnawing, its ears perked up" what
- "The raptor licks its lips, lizard-like" what
- "The raptor is almost on the kids. Grant coughs conspicuously. The raptor whirls, studies Grant. He looks back at the children" I lost it reading this. Jesus, Grant, are you even trying?
- "The Rex paws after it, then drops down to four legs and gives the copter a final swipe with its tail". Did the writer forget the size of the T. rex's arms?

Some cheesy lines:

- "Extinct animals should stay extinct!" Gennaro, after panicking and running from the jeep. Maybe you should've waited until you're out of the T.rex earshot before screaming that.
- "You don't want to hurt Mr. Regis.  Go away.  Ed's your friend.  Back off!" Ed Regis, to a fully-grown T. rex.
- "Yo ho, I'll close this place down ..." Gennaro singing a shanty while high on morphine.
- "Oh good, 'cause I love the park!  It's more than we ever dreamed!  Those brachiosaurs are so big!  And those Spitters - (he spits) - incredible!  I only have one problem. Aren't we going to have pterodactyls? - (he frowns, smacks his forehead) - Oh, they'd fly away! (Gennaro looks off, watching the imaginary pterodactyls fly away.)" Gennaro to Hammond, while doped.
- "There's a raptor on the roof of this building.  Open that gate and you're a dead man" Ellie's succinct warning to Alan.
- "I just remembered something.  Raptors are born in large litters. There's probably more coming" Clutches, Tim. Clutches.
- "Hey you cretaceous dromaeosaur, you can't catch me.  Hey, come and get me, you flat-snouted Mongolian beast.  Hey!" Ellie's idea of an insult to a Velociraptor. And the Raptor actually gets distracted by that.
- "And then there were none" Grant's one-liner after the last Raptor is killed. Slow clap.
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: Favorite JW FK character thread! [POOL] [SPOILERS]
Spinosaur4.4

Replies: 12
Views: 875

Search in: Film Universe   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: Favorite JW FK character thread! [POOL] [SPOILERS]    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeMon Jun 18, 2018 8:35 pm
Sickle_Claw wrote:
Spinosaur4.4 wrote:
Mr. Robustus wrote:
My vote was for Maisie. That little girl, Isabella Sermon, did a fantastic acting job, and she was definitely the heart of the movie. Easily the best child character in the franchise, and I'm glad the final scenes implied she will be returning for the next movie. Although I guess it wouldn't be above the Jurassic Park franchise to just write her out (Trevorrow: "Oh, they were just dropping her off at Iris's house. Now here's a new child character for this movie!")

I also really liked Mills. Sure, he was slightly cartoonish - especially with his murdering of Lockwood - but he was a very enjoyable villain, and kind of the perfect asshole victim that you can't wait to see his comeuppance. He's kind of how I imagined a proper movie version of Dodgson would be, personality-wise. If we never get a return from Dodgson, I will happily accept Mills as a stand-in for him.


Fully agree with you about Maisie. She's the best kid of JP franchise. They handled her very well. People know that I was the #1 HATER of kids in movies here and when they announced JW FK would have a kid I got super mad. I have to burn my mounth now because she was amazing. Maisie is clever, not annoying and USEFULL. All I wanted for a kid.

About Mills, loved him also (forgot to add him lmao). IMO he's the best villain of the franchise, I like how he's charismatic and flamboyant at first, and then starts showing his darker side (first screaming with Maisie, then with Wu, showing his real intentions to sell the dinosaurs...)


You also like Maisie because....


Spoiler:


Pssst Sickle, no way it's because of that too, I'm not biased. Laughing


Yeah, I confess I like her also because of that twist. Razz
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: Favorite JW FK character thread! [POOL] [SPOILERS]
Sickle_Claw

Replies: 12
Views: 875

Search in: Film Universe   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: Favorite JW FK character thread! [POOL] [SPOILERS]    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeMon Jun 18, 2018 3:10 am
Spinosaur4.4 wrote:
Mr. Robustus wrote:
My vote was for Maisie. That little girl, Isabella Sermon, did a fantastic acting job, and she was definitely the heart of the movie. Easily the best child character in the franchise, and I'm glad the final scenes implied she will be returning for the next movie. Although I guess it wouldn't be above the Jurassic Park franchise to just write her out (Trevorrow: "Oh, they were just dropping her off at Iris's house. Now here's a new child character for this movie!")

I also really liked Mills. Sure, he was slightly cartoonish - especially with his murdering of Lockwood - but he was a very enjoyable villain, and kind of the perfect asshole victim that you can't wait to see his comeuppance. He's kind of how I imagined a proper movie version of Dodgson would be, personality-wise. If we never get a return from Dodgson, I will happily accept Mills as a stand-in for him.


Fully agree with you about Maisie. She's the best kid of JP franchise. They handled her very well. People know that I was the #1 HATER of kids in movies here and when they announced JW FK would have a kid I got super mad. I have to burn my mounth now because she was amazing. Maisie is clever, not annoying and USEFULL. All I wanted for a kid.

About Mills, loved him also (forgot to add him lmao). IMO he's the best villain of the franchise, I like how he's charismatic and flamboyant at first, and then starts showing his darker side (first screaming with Maisie, then with Wu, showing his real intentions to sell the dinosaurs...)


You also like Maisie because....


Spoiler:
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: Favorite JW FK character thread! [POOL] [SPOILERS]
Spinosaur4.4

Replies: 12
Views: 875

Search in: Film Universe   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: Favorite JW FK character thread! [POOL] [SPOILERS]    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeSun Jun 17, 2018 10:34 pm
Mr. Robustus wrote:
My vote was for Maisie. That little girl, Isabella Sermon, did a fantastic acting job, and she was definitely the heart of the movie. Easily the best child character in the franchise, and I'm glad the final scenes implied she will be returning for the next movie. Although I guess it wouldn't be above the Jurassic Park franchise to just write her out (Trevorrow: "Oh, they were just dropping her off at Iris's house. Now here's a new child character for this movie!")

I also really liked Mills. Sure, he was slightly cartoonish - especially with his murdering of Lockwood - but he was a very enjoyable villain, and kind of the perfect asshole victim that you can't wait to see his comeuppance. He's kind of how I imagined a proper movie version of Dodgson would be, personality-wise. If we never get a return from Dodgson, I will happily accept Mills as a stand-in for him.


Fully agree with you about Maisie. She's the best kid of JP franchise. They handled her very well. People know that I was the #1 HATER of kids in movies here and when they announced JW FK would have a kid I got super mad. I have to burn my mounth now because she was amazing. Maisie is clever, not annoying and USEFULL. All I wanted for a kid.

About Mills, loved him also (forgot to add him lmao). IMO he's the best villain of the franchise, I like how he's charismatic and flamboyant at first, and then starts showing his darker side (first screaming with Maisie, then with Wu, showing his real intentions to sell the dinosaurs...)
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: Jurassic Park Franchise Prehistoric Fauna Masterpost
1morey

Replies: 66
Views: 8270

Search in: Film Universe   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: Jurassic Park Franchise Prehistoric Fauna Masterpost    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeMon Jun 04, 2018 2:41 am
After many hours of research. I have compiled a master list of every prehistoric fauna to appear across the Jurassic Park franchise (films, books, comics, toys, video games, and as artwork or part of the dinopedia/glossary on the JP institute website).

What I did not include in the list were unidentifiable animals from the comics, cancelled toyline figures/video games, or animals that are only mentioned but do not show up on a population count/list or make any sort of physical appearance. Current nomina dubia that haven't been reclassified are placed in a separate section.

Parentheses indicate the following:

* Junior synonyms.

* Specific appearances for the Unspecified Ammonite genera.

* Extant status for certain animals.

* Descriptors indicating that Eucnemesaurus and Unaysaurus are incorrectly depicted.

So here is the list:

Alphabetized list:


Animals by Most Recent Appearance:
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: Jurassic World II Box office expectations
Nublar7

Replies: 28
Views: 2028

Search in: Film Universe   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: Jurassic World II Box office expectations    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeFri Mar 23, 2018 2:22 pm
Rhedosaurus wrote:
Funny you mention the Avengers movies. I think we have to keep the possibility of Infinity War going on a rampage like Black Panther has been doing and how it might affect Fallen Kingdom.
Infinity War very well could go on a rampage like Black Panther because it is perhaps the biggest single event movie in years. Honestly when the year is all said and done, it is probably likely the Black Panther and Infinity War are #1 and #2 in some form. Unless we see another run like Jurassic World, Fallen Kingdom will probably be finishing in the #3 spot, which is still amazing since #1 and #2 are likely to each gross $650 million+ domestically.

Anyways, with all that said, I don't see Infinity War having much of an impact on Fallen Kingdom directly. There is just too much of a gap between films and that gap only got bigger when they moved Infinity War up a week. When Fallen Kingdom hits theaters(in the US) that would be Infinity War's 9th weekend. It will be a spec on the radar by mid/end of June. For example Black Panther made $26 million last weekend and that was only week 5 for that film. By the time Black Panther hits weekend 9 it is probably only making $3-4 million. Even big event films like TFA($6 million) and JW($1.9 million) were no threat to anyone 9 weeks later.

I would say the worry wildcard is maybe Solo. I don't think that movie is going to do amazing because there seems to be minimal hype and anticipation even from most Star Wars fans. But because it is Star Wars I am sure it will still make a lot of money, just no where near the levels of TFA, Rogue One and TLJ. But even then, that's the 5th weekend for that film when FK comes out.

Deadpool 2 is 6 weeks before, so again shouldn't be much concern by June 22nd. Really I think the only major threat to put a dent in it is Incredibles 2. Its a different target audience than FK, but there is only so much money to go around that weekend and that movie imo will open huge the weekend before. But if Incredibles 2 maybe only makes like $90-100 million its opening weekend, then I think it could be possible that the potential for a $190-200 million weekend for FK could be on the table.

But I think $180 million is probably a more safer and realistic prediction. At least as of right now.

Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: The Marvel Comics Thread
Rhedosaurus

Replies: 621
Views: 10659

Search in: General Film Discussion   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: The Marvel Comics Thread    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeWed Mar 14, 2018 7:56 am
Black Panther has not only made over $1 billion dollars, but has become the first MCU movie to stay at #1 at the box office for 4 weeks in a row. Not even the first 2 Avengers movie have done that.

This movie has destroyed record after record as if they were nothing. Not only that, but I saw that if it stays number 1 for this weekend, it will be the first movie to do so since Avatar.

And the MCU continues its domination.
Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Forum_10Topic: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!
JD-man

Replies: 85
Views: 9922

Search in: Dinosaur Jungles   Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe EmptySubject: JD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!    Topics tagged under 1 on Jurassic Mainframe Icon_minitimeTue Mar 06, 2018 9:54 pm
My 44th review for this thread is a negative 1 for Miller/Blasing's Dinosaur George and the Paleonauts: Raptor Island. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Yes" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Yes" votes it can get because it's outnumbered by opposing reviews (which don't give a good idea of what to expect). Many thanks in advance.

Bad dino doc + bad dino movie ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R1ANUT6L08H5CM/ref=pe_1098610_137716200_cm_rv_eml_rv0_rv ): 1/5

Short version: As far as I know, most dino time travel books aren't meant to be educational. Of those that are, I recommend reading White's Dinosaur Hunter: The Ultimate Guide to the Biggest Game in conjunction with other, more educational books (E.g. Naish/Barrett's Dinosaurs: How They Lived and Evolved). Miller/Blasing's Dinosaur George and the Paleonauts: Raptor Island (henceforth DG) fails at being either a decent educational book or a decent science fiction book.

Long version: Read on.

As you may remember, I said that Jurassic Fight Club is 1 of the worst dino docs ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R2FFY9S77ANRTK/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0810957981 ). Despite this, I originally thought that DG was going to be better than JFC given that dino books are usually better than dino docs. Boy, was I wrong about DG! Not only is DG as bad as JFC in some ways, but also as bad as the movie The Lost World: Jurassic Park (henceforth JP2) in other ways. In this review, I list the 4 main reasons why I think that is, besides the annoyingly-repetitive writing.*

1) In DG, George is the only well-defined/developed character, & not in a good way: He's basically an 18-year-old male version of Sarah Harding from JP2 (I.e. A "naive, impulsive paleontologist...whose dumb decisions constantly put the team in greater danger");** This is especially apparent when he 1st compares the Saichania's poor eyesight to that of rhinos, but then makes a sudden move; Similarly, in JP2, Sarah 1st explains "the dangers of the bull rex tracking the group with its powerful olfactory sense, but [then] brings the jacket coated in the infant's blood with her as they flee."** The other Paleonauts are just character archetypes. More specifically, Vince Witmer is "The Lancer", Lloyd Lance is "The Big Guy", Parker Holtz is "The Smart Guy", & Sonya Currie is "The Chick".** There's also Professor Stone & Dr. Morgan, but they're only in Chapter 1.

2) In some ways, DG's dromaeosaurs are better than JFC's (E.g. They're more fully feathered, though not entirely). In other ways, DG's dromaeosaurs are worse than JFC's (E.g. They have whip-like tails). In still other ways, they're about the same (E.g. They're "super persistent" predators of "impossibly large prey").** This is especially apparent in Chapter 8, when a pack of 30 flightless, blue jay-sized "mini-raptors" attack George over & over again despite being blasted with a surge gun & attacked by a 20-ft constrictor, among other things. Put another way, Chapter 8 is basically an extreme version of JP2's "Compy Attack" scene.

3) I have 2 major problems with DG's story: 1) It's dependent on the reader caring about the characters; See reason #1 above for why that's a major problem; 2) As indicated by its sub-title, DG mostly takes place on/around Raptor Island in Southern Asia, presumably the Gobi region given that that's where all the dinos are from; The problem is that's near the center of the continent, & it's not like Asia ever had an inland sea like the Western Interior Sea of N.America; In other words, DG's story is dependent on a setting that could never have existed.

4) DG's text is hit-&-miss in terms of getting the facts straight. This is especially apparent in "PaleoFacts" because the misses stick out more with less text.*** However, the main text misses may be worse in degree: Like JFC's misses, some of DG's are due to being very outdated (E.g. Compare the Miller/Blasing quote to the Naish/Barrett quote); Also like JFC's misses, some of DG's are due to being very nonsensical (E.g. "A creature, about the size of an owl, suddenly swooped down from its perch above and grabbed the lizard in midair. At first, George thought it must have been some sort of bird, but when it landed on the ground it quickly ran into the woods on only its back legs. It was no bird. It was a flying dinosaur!").

*E.g. The fact that George dislikes guns is stated 4 times in the span of 1 chapter, including twice in the same paragraph.

**Google "The Lost World: Jurassic Park (Film) - TV Tropes" & "Raptor Attack - TV Tropes" for reasons #1 & #2, respectively.

***In "PaleoFacts" alone, it's claimed that Nemegtosaurus was 7 m tall & 15.2 m long (More like 2.46 m tall & 12 m long), Saichania was 2.4 m tall (More like 1.3 m tall), Plesiosaurus was 7 m long & 3 tons (More like 3-5 m long & 150 kg), Plesiosaurus lived during the Late Cretaceous (It didn't), Bactrosaurus means "Bactrian lizard" (It doesn't), & Tylosaurus was 20 tons (More like 4.5 tons), among other things.

Quoting Miller/Blasing:
Quote :
George knew this species. His uncle taught him a lot growing up. Because of that, he knew by the end of the Jurassic Period nearly all members of the Sauropod family had become extinct. A few species managed to survive all the way to the end of the late Cretaceous Period when they, along with all other non-avian dinosaurs, became extinct. The majority of the long necks that survived into late Cretaceous were from the Titanosaurus family. Although not as large as their earlier cousins, they were still massive dinosaurs and among the largest living things on earth by the end of the Cretaceous Period.


Quoting Naish/Barrett (See Dinosaurs: How They Lived and Evolved):
Quote :
As recently as the 1990s it was thought that sauropods were a mostly Jurassic event and that they had largely disappeared by the Cretaceous. We now know that this view was completely inaccurate, and that sauropods were a major presence on many continents throughout much of the Cretaceous. And, rather than being stagnant or static in evolutionary terms, they were constantly evolving new anatomical features and new ways of cropping plants.
Back to top 
Page 1 of 3Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next
Jump to: