(Fwd) Re: Errors in Jurassic Park (Movie) (posted for D. Martill)

From
Date
Reply-To
From: "GIA PENDRED Geology" <PENDREDV@geol.port.ac.uk>
To: paleonet-owner@nhm.ac.uk
Date:          Wed, 10 Jan 1996 09:25:13 GMT
Subject:       (Fwd) Re: Errors in Jurassic Park (Movie)
Priority: normal
Status: U

This is posted for David MARTILL (MARTILLD@geol.port.ac.uk) :

"Sounds like a great way to teach science, providing it shows that the
errors come from the film makers and not from scientific advisers".

PS. My replies highlighted thus *******


On Thu, 04 Jan 1996 10:02:20 -0500, Bret Bennington wrote:
>Can anyone provide me with any print references or personal observations
>regarding the scientific accuracy of the film that I can pass along to
>Valley Stream Jr High School?

Below are some errors (& overstatements) in JP:

  There are no sonar fossil detectors of such image quality as the
equipment shown in the field camp (though David Gillette tried to use a
sonar probing device during Seismosaurus excavations);

*********Some shallow seismic techniques are now good ebough to be
able to pick out such objects as large concretions which may contain
fossils. Theroretically a shallow seismic technique could work on big
bones, especially if there was a lot of pyrite in them. Speak to a
geophysissist such as Ian Hill at Leicester University, or Max Meju
at the same place.



  The Dilophosaurus was probably not endowed with neck frill
(borrowed from Australian frilled lizard) nor coud spit venomous
saliva (though its bite could have been poisonous due to bacteria
developing in rotting meat in theropod dental serrations; bacterial
toxins help the Komodo dragon in killing their prey);

******** Not known if it could or could not spit venomous saliva.
Although this is a fantasy of the film maker, to say that any
dinosaur could NOT spit venom is risky. I am sure that some dinosaurs
had bizarre or unusual ways of subduing prey.

  The Brachiosaurus had too large head, probably could not stand up on
hind legs only (was too front-heavy; other sauropods could rear up for
feeding or defence with more ease), sneezing is also doubtful, because
this diaphragm reflex is typically mammalian (dinosaurs did not have
rib-less belly separated by the diaphragm from the ribcage containing
lungs).

******** According to McNeil Alexander sauropods had no problem
rearing up on hind legs. Forget the reference, but should appear in
BIDS.

   Most dinosaurs (except the two above) in the Jurassic Park were not
Jurassic, but Cretaceous.

********But, because the whole thing is fantasy it surely does not
matter.

   The Velociraptor was too big (rather Deinonychus-sized), and too
intelligent.

***********Who says it was too intelligent?


   The Tyrannosaurus' vision was rather bird-like than frog-like, thus the
idea that it could see only moving objects was only necessary to allow
the people to escape from sure death in close contact with the T. rex (and
perhaps a heritage from the frog DNA used in the JP genetic lab).

   The Triceratops dung was of course much too big, compared to any known
coproliths and any possible rectal diameter of a dinosaur.

*********Rectal diameter is no guide to size of a dung heap. Time of
excretion and size of colon/rectum would be more reliable guides.
After all, a lot of faeces could come out of a small anal orifice
provided such an orifice were open for a long period.


                       ******************************