It's useless to put up T-rex vs spino, soo many more interesting things about dinosaurs... t-rex would win tho :D

🤣🤣 and then said I'm not gonna tell you who would win (t-rex) then laughs🤣 brilliant love his energy ☺️

Yeah, that was the most funny part of the interview. He really enjoyed this interview, I am happy I watched it 🙂

@@lootjunior no it’s 50-50

I guess every paleontologist has a love/hate relationship with jurassic park saga and other films because they’re so inaccurate but at the same time it’s the reason why they wanted to do that job as a kid

Specifically, children in monster movies. Although the dog that they have to return for is usually more annoying still.

@@bomcabedal Sometimes one must risk a few minutes of life and a few inches of limb. To rush into a burning building to rescue a cat is a damn fool thing to do, but to come out without the cat is even worse. "Damn! I've gone insane!" Moist Von Lipwig in Pratchett's Going Postal.

Movie Dr. Grant yes, but not book Dr. Grant, who liked kids as they were into dinosaurs as well

Except in the book, Grant absolutely loved kids. Movie Grant has so many issues that this one pales in comparison.

THe book was diferent there it was hammond that hated chilren . andd Grant loved children for their interest in dinosaurs. I always recomend watch the movie first , then read the book as the movie is a disapointment, in comparison.

agreed😂 he tells us why we know nowadays it isnt accurate, but he acknowledges that its just goofy dino fiction at the end of the day and what dino nerd doesnt love a good well animated dino fight lol

LOL, You cant RATE how "REAL" something is merely based on "Modern Paleontologist Theory". A better title would be "How we believed Dinosaurs were then vs now". The real truth is Dinosaur existence is pure "Speculation". There is no concrete proof that Dinosaurs ever existed. There's actually more evidence to the contrary but Dinosaurs are Big Bucks & humans love Mythology. I don't blame people for using there imagination but the reality should also be addressed.

@@JubioHDX Exactly. If I wanted realistic dinosaurs I’d watch a BBC or Discovery Channel documentary. For movies like this, give me the over the top stuff!

realistic dinosaurs do NOT come from those two, save for WWD and Planet Dinosaur from BBC. The best come from Apple TV's Prehistoric Planet and Netflix's Life on our Planet. Discovery Channel has some terrible ones.@@Ragan31687

@@Ragan31687 this is literally a video discussing if it's accurate or not

Except in the movie Henry Wu knew it likely could do that. He was only surprised when he learned it actually evaded thermal tracking.

but that guy is just condescending

@BurningSaints the problem come to the way he explain the thinbgs , until being severe to some notes.

@@daegnaxqelil2733 Maybe don't make dumb decissions for your movie and one would not have to be condescending?

@@Dead25m Scientific inaccuracies in a literal science fiction action thriller are not dumb decisions. Filmmaking isn’t about replicating real life. Jurassic Park with scientifically accurate dinosaurs would be boring. The T rex would likely not even attack humans because we don’t look like their prey and carnivores spend most of their time resting rather than hunting.

dude you supose to be up on the top

I had a good laugh at that part.

Cracked me up

Depends who strikes first. Thats mainly it.

In real life rex win 90%

It's good! And they should feather the next jurassic park. ☝️

This is literally a portrait of the modern Era and all its issues. Somebody judging made up things, while never ever having seen the things he judges in real life. For sure this lad has more clues about Dinos than 99% of all people on this lovely Planet. Still we all have no f*cking clue of dinosaurs and making up things all the time. AMAZING

@@Andrew-Lee91 🤷‍♂️

@@hansolowe19 Watch the trailer for Jurassic World: Dominion.

@@Andrew-Lee91 I have never seen USA with my own eyes but we know it exists.

She also just had a goat. This seems to be unintenional on the part of the film makers, but comparing to a human an about 50kg/110lbs goat would be a decent meal for a maybe 5 to 10 ton animal like that. There's some inedible parts to a goat, but that'd still be like one of us just having eaten about 300 grams / 0.7lbs of meat. If you've been getting regular meals in and you just ate that, it's just not really time to go hunting again. Then the humans start triggering her hunting instincts, and she ends up eating the lawyer. But that's not really like hunting to eat, that's more like having beer and snacks because you're having friends over and it feels like a good situation for beer and snacks. She's sort of provoked into hunting by people running and screaming and being prey-like. The scene to me feels like it is almost accidentally a really nice realistic depiction of predator behavior.

that's actually a thing. you can confuse an ambush predator that's trying to sneak up by walking towards it. It expects you to either run away or be defensive, not aggressive

​@@HiopXthis is the strategy of the Canada goose

@@user-fc8xw4fi5v truly the scariest dinosaur alive. (Australians might disagree)

The reality is... they could just play it off as Grant being wrong the Rexy just not being interested... She just ate and nothing is posing a threat. Like mentioned above, it would be clearly unintentional but a good franchise uses the unintentional to better the film later.

I don't know, I read spoilers like that and I think "recompensating like whoa". Please, at least delete the last line. Or hide it under the "read more" bit.

Julia You shouldn't be looking at the comments of videos if you're worrying about spoilers. Comments are best used and added after you watch the video not only to avoid spoilers, but to keep from making a point they eventually make in the video. Also it's not much of a spoiler. The T-Rex is a pure land animal the Spinosarus was thought to spend most of it's time in the water (like a crocodile). So on land where the fight happens in the movie the T-Rex would be much more in it's element.

@@Julia-lk8jn you're criticizing someone's comment? Really? About a video talking about a movie that 21 years old? That's your fault for looking at the comment section instead of focusing on the video.

but he still gave it an 8/10 because he likes the scene.

Repent to Jesus Christ “Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”” ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭4:4‬ ‭NIV‬‬ M

The eyesight thing is from the book, but unfortunately it's poorly translated into the movie. In the book, Alan Grant was shocked, terrified by his close encounter with a living T-rex, he couldn't move (also was all alone in the scene, I think, unlike in the movie, where he has Lex by his side), the Rex couldn't see him, but still could sniff him and roared at him from the close distance. He was puzzled at first, then made a connection to what Henry Wu told him earlier, how they combine the paleoDNA with modern lizard, frogs and stuff (it's still ridiculous, because even frogs and lizards can see unmoving things, they just happen to be able to spot moving things better), so he came to the conclusion, that the Rexy's brain somehow mutated from the frog DNA. It's weird, but it's somehow justified in the book. Perhaps another showcase, on how the JP scientists had absolutely no idea, what they were doing. Maybe they unintentionally messed something and it resulted in Rexy's bad eyesight. Well, it's not perfect, but it still has some reasoning in there. But in the movie? It sells it as a fact, that T-rex had a bad eyesight from get go. Grant even mentioned it during the kid scare scene, way before meeting any living T-rex. He said to the kid something like "but the raptor, unlike a T-rex, will see you", he still sells it as a fact, that Rexes had bad eyes. I love the JP/W movies, but yes, they are flawed.

@@Croftice1 yeah and what's even more weird is that it gets retconned in the second book where it's explained that T-rex definitelly didn't have poor eyesight

@@Croftice1 The book actually makes a big point about whether or not the dinosaurs are actually dinosaurs. This always struck me as Michael Crichton protecting himself in case new information emerged. The idea of cross-contamination is something I think the books should have explored more. In the book, Wu actually talked with Hammond about altering the dinosaurs to make them easier to manage. It was a hugely important aspect of the story. The JP movies aren't very good, because they tend to lack giving proper context to things and scenes. Boiling down T-Rex to "HURRRRRRRRRR, ITS VISION IS BASED ON MOVEMENT!!!!!" (because Spielberg detests subtly and actually earning his scenes) is one of the movie's biggest sins.

"I only need to run faster than the other guy, so what if I convince the other guy not to run at all?!"

The ultimate betrayal.

Then he needs to do more. Ankylosaurus that can't crush a plexi-glass hamster ball with 2 brats in cos dumb script says "don't kill the kids, we don't do that." Excuse me, that dinosaur's a kid too! And he trumps you, brats!

@@kyachdistent1301Partially unrelated, but he does do more! If you're interested, he has a podcast called Terrible Lizards and its pretty interesting

He has a podcast with a comedian called Terrible Lizards. It's really good.

Dude, that's precisely why they're extinct! They all cracked their heads open! Kidding. Yeah, the he-can't-see-you-if-you-don't-move thing was just so transparently stupid, I never understood why they'd use it.

@@wilverbalPersonally, I always remembered the book having Grant believing that they saw based on movement, only the be proven wrong when the T-rex hits him and throws him away, making him realise that it saw perfectly even though he was still and it was really dark. Every youtube video however keeps saying the book was the other way around: that Grant didn't know that and realised it because the T-rex didn't notice him when he was paralysed with fear. I guess if most booktubers say that, it must be what's written, but I could swear the book I read had it the other way around.

I belive its more if its not moving it wouldnt be recognized as prey in the book it makes more sense than the movie the movie is still better tho

Tigers can stun their prey with a roar before attacking. If the T-Rex could roar, it would likely have the same effect on its prey.

@@AHungryAllosaurus Yes, because the tiger is, of course, directly descended from the T-Rex... Come on, you just heard the actual expert in the video saying it's silly that they roar.

@@AHungryAllosaurus Tiger roars and stunts their prey? What kind of bullshit is this?

@@iamleoooo Infrasound, do you understand that?

@@iamleoooo exactly what a silly comment. Anyone who has watched any sort of history channel videos or such, no where does a Tiger "roar" when attacking to "stun" their prey. lol what an idiot. They attack quietly and fast so the prey doesn't get away.

Repent to Jesus Christ “Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”” ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭4:4‬ ‭NIV‬‬ J

He taught Evolution and Animal Plant Diversity lectures when I was at QMUL, he's a really cool guy and absolutely knows his stuff!

Most of what he said was pretty damn good, but there was some weird/wrong information he stated :/

@@thedapperdibble3622 Such as? Also remember that this is on the fly. Depending on what, you could cut him some slack. And this seems like the kind of guy that if you proved something he said wrong, he'd issue a retraction.

@@Oakshield2 ye ik lol, I'm not trying to hold anything against him, it's ridiculous to expect anyone to remember and know everything in their field of study.

Yeah but not by a whole lot. They also lived millions of years apart and on completely different sides of the world. And many hadrosaurs and iguanadontids were quite a big larger than the theropods that hunted them. The biggest hadrosaur was Shantungosaurus at nearly 60ft long and 16 metric tons, much bigger than the Tarbosaurus that lived alongside it.

@@geovonnie69 Yes, the fact that they lived in different location is also a good point.

Yeah that Carnotaurus in the movie seems to be t rex sized or even bigger, nothing like the slender cheetah-esk animal we know it was. Also the arms! Movies allways gets the Carnos arms wrong!

Yeah, people like making prehistoric predators big, but seem to forget that most predators are actually smaller than their prey, otherwise it'd be hard to maintain the body size based on the food available. Especially when predators usually fail more often than succeed when hunting. Except for the dragonfly, but that's a different discussion.

@@EmilForsberg_GRYBO The movie was originally going to use T.rex actually, but they decided that it was overused so switched to Carnotaurus~

Eh they may have been pretty aggressive. Look how aggressive geese are. Imagine being around a large, meat eating Goose, Rooster or Cassowary.

@@auditoryproductions1831absolutely. Geese are assholes. Even ones that have been raised on a farm around people their whole lives. I know this from experience. Aggressive assholes!

@@auditoryproductions1831 If Cassowaries ever develop a taste for meat, send me to Mars.

@@FoxtrotMouse i have terrible news

@@Star-pl1xs Fire up the Rocket, boys!

that is so true because predators rely on their health to actually eat so one injury and they might not be able to hunt ever again or at least not hunt for long time so they HAVE to be more cautius, not saying injuries dont affect herbivores but at least carnivores are rare in comparison to herbivores, there is probably enough time for a herbivore to heal before a carnivore aims on eating it again but for carnivores its bad because they are already hungry when they do this so something stopping them to hunt for long time is really bad for their health

Living in south Carolina I had a deer try to gore my car while I was driving. Barely missed me.

I’ve lived in CO, CA, and SC. Deer have always been the issue for me and my circles, but absolutely correct. Herbivores are much more likely to be dangerous as a built in self-preservation mechanism. Predatory animals that I’ve encountered are easily scared off as long as they aren’t starving or rabid.

@@princessjesstarca A line I will always remember in Jurassic Park (the book I don't think it's the movie) is when Ian Malcolm points out to everyone that preditories don't eat other or attack other animals it views as a predator, that predator has to learn at some point that humans are food before they will confidently attack it in nature. He's talking about the Raptors and their aggression towards people being a telling indication that those Raptors already knew humans where food through attacks or something else Ingen and Hammond were trying to keep quiet to get the green light on the park. Since herbivores instinctively don't view any animal as food ever and view all other unfamiliar animals as a possible threat they are hardwired to defend themselves much more violently than a predator would since it's required for their survival against predators they let get too close.

@@firegator6853 i lived in the woods near a farm and i was able to sit and listen to music while black bears walked by about 50 feet away and if i got up the sow would stare to see if i was gonna approach which i never did and then she'd just walk away if a loud helicopter came by she and her cubs would run away,...racoons are the same i saw one on my trash once it just started at me and i walked towards it and it ran away...ive seen deers they usually stare for a long time and unless i got nuts or fruit they just run off

In the first film they do acknowledge the sex change is because of the frog dna but they never say anything about the movement part.

Always loved Jurassic Park and have never actually read the book but I will now.

@@peytoncharles3946 They did at least come back in World and freely admit NONE of the dinos are really accurate. It's my favorite bit of dialogue just because it covers so many inaccuracies AND condems the money makers for demanding things without thinking about the actual results. "Nothing in Jurassic World is natural, we have always filled gaps in the genome with the DNA of other animals. And if the genetic code was pure, many of them would look quite different. But you didn't ask for reality, you asked for more teeth." - Dr. Wu

First movie states that dinos are able to change sex because of frog genes…

Honestly did the author absolutely zero justice LMFAO

That's just how nature works. Sensationalised dinosaurs in media often forget to remind us that these were in fact animals and they only would've done what was necessary for their survival. The worst example, in my opinion, is dinosaurs having long-drawn out battles for no reason other than spectacle. The entire point of a hunt is to end it quickly so that the energy gained from the prey outweighs the energy spent to catch it. Like I mentioned, dinosaurs were once living creatures, and as a result they were constrained by the exact same limitations as modern animals. Therefore there are many similarities you can draw from 😊

Yeah me too. Though it's a shame there hasn't been a good Dino movie since JP and TLW

You may like BBC'S Prehistoric Planet!

They fairly recently recreated the vocalizations t-rex is thought to made. Due to the shape of their skull/ears, it's thought they didn't do open-mouth vocalizations at all, but rather very deep, bass growls and rumbles. If you haven't heard it I'd recommend checking it out. /watch?v=cpipaUfcnmM

@@BigMikeMcBastard I have heard it and believe it's true. It's similar to what elephants do for distance communication. Elephants far away can feel this sound resonating in the ground through their feet. This is realistic. Wish the movies, documentaries would catch up.

@@BigMikeMcBastard I saw this and believe it to be true

Surprised predators do it. You sneak up on a bear in the woods, it will roar, kill you, and then eat you. The dinos are transitioning from humans as the masters, to being prey. The Trex knows humans can make it sleep with tranq darts (and probably hurt it), so it's confused and not sure if the people are prey/threats/or ignores.

Much Like the Indoraptor Did when Taking Out A Few Mercenaries

Pretty much every animal is highly misrepresented in movies, sorry to say - but hey reality

@@Thesunscreen or technically not reality lol

Our knowledge of them really changes by the day these last several years... you couldn't really expect someone from 20-30 years ago to know all the things we just recently discovered. Also, there are some liberties that filmmakers have to take, and when they do at least the finished product should be entertaining, and the first 3 JP movies are definitely entertaining.

@@skycat04 i am definitely willing to excuse the film makers i just think it would be so entertaining/interesting to see dinosaurs illustrated correctly or at the very least hilarious

Don't watch Hollywood wood for anything accurate, because they can't even do guns properly.

True, but then again that could be seen as a plot excuse for doing the exact same thing they are portraying in their characters. And the truth is that, even if the franchise half-heartedly explains that the dinos don't necessarily look realistic, their representation still serves as what most people think these animals were like (and I doubt most people even remembers or fully appreciates the in-lore explanations of unrealism). As such, it makes sense to point out the unrealism whenever we're treating the subject more seriously.

Tbf we see a lot of different versions of the same dinosaur species throughout the series, and in the books we know all the dinos of Nublar were versions up to 4.1.What this probably means is the dinosaurs were modified to look more like they wanted to, after the original few versions probably looked a lot more accurate.It’s also hinted with how the older models(versions) are described much more like their real versions like the dilophasaur.And, in the films, we see different versions of Tyrannosaurs, raptors, brachiosaurs, apatosaurs, ankylosaurs and stegosaurs, like how in Sorna there are the very colourful tiger striped velociraptors of the grass who are a lot less social and more like the first films raptors but more agressive and less intelligent, but in the 3rd film we see the quill feather raptors who are a lot more realistic and act much more like real animals complete with bird like calls and pack behaviour.They probably went through a lot of versions, changing them to look better or more pure depending on preference, so since T rexes all looked cool they didn’t modify them but did only choose the brown tyrannosaur to star since the brown one was easier to see then camouflage green colour of Sorna rexes.Meanwhile they modified the brachiosaurs from the first films greyish brown to the thirds more colourful and spiked back ones which were probably done by Wu to make more realistic dinosaurs.And of course ones like the Spinosaur were not designed to ever be shown or even properly made but instead as amalgam testing so they didn’t really care. Cause that’s probably why the older ones look more real generally while Jurassic parks are more fake, because Hammond was more about what was real(in films mainly) so would have wanted dinosaurs to be as real as possible looking, and Sorna was full of much more realistic dinosaurs because he wasn’t gonna add the colourful and more camouflaged ones yet, so his guests could see the first dinos easier.Jurassic world under Clair was only about profit, so accuracy mattered little to them, hence Wu’s rant to Simon Masrani because he could easily have made real dinosaurs but Masrani and everyone on the board didn’t want real, they wanted cooler dream like ones.

@@hubertdenise3100 In the books, no dino is made on Isla Nublar, all park's dinos were made on Isla Sorna and shipped to Nublar. Sorna acted as a dinosaur creating factory, "Site-B", InGen's little secret. Nublar was just a exposition, a butique window. Not sure how it was in the movies, Spielberg had a tendency to sometimes change stuff here and there. In the first movie, we see a little raptor baby being born, so probably they were created on Nublar as well. But then what's the reason for Sorna's existence? Why's there a second island with dinosaurs and "long ago abandoned" buildings? As John Hammond said himself in the begining of The Lost World JP movie, when Malcolm visits him, "thank god for the second island". But what's the purpose of your second island, John? The way the first novel Jurassic Park ends, with dinos terminated and the whole Isla Nublar being nuked (quite different from the movie's end), Crichton was forced to come up with a sequel and it couldn't take place on the same island, so he made Isla Sorna, Site-B, the real dino factory and the plot of the book was about uncovering InGen's dirty secret. The movie ends differently. The park is closed, but dinos still live and the island is left intact. But since in the second book it all happens on another island and the second movie was again adaptation of the second book, they couldn't jsut so return to Isla Nublar and had to go with Isla Sorna. That's why you shouldn't change the ending of a movie based on a book. XD

@Alexandra Hefnerová incorrect they where dinosaurs made on isla nublar the embryos that Dennis stole and the lab would not be there if the was not made on isla nublar. Plus Michael Crichton never planned for a second book so site B did not exist intill he wrote the lost world and infact it's his only sequel he has done

See the problem with that is, they used the dna of frogs... which makes absolutley no sense, and if they definitelly wouldn't look like they do in the film if you'd have a dinosaur frog hybrid

Deinonychus actually but yes. Utahraptor wasn't found until the movie was basically about to hit theaters. Michael Crichton had heard about Deinonychus though which was recent when he wrote the book. Thought Velociraptor sounded scarier.

Seen a moern raptors list, the ones who ssem t fit the size of the raptors movies is dakotaraptor.

Wasn't it Achillobator?

I believe at the time the book was written, Deinonychus was actually considired a velociraptor subspecies (Velociraptor Antihorrpus i believe). So technically calling a Deinonychus a velociraptor would be accurate at the time. and of course once implemented into the novel/movie world it can/should be related to that at least within the franchise

it is deinonychus.

Other then the last part about a new is correct the T. rex is the same as the the first movie

T-Rex are not blind they have the best vision in the animal kingdom.

@@chrisshook8471 did you actually read anything I wrote? I know T-Rex wasn't blind, but the fact is the dinosaurs in the Jurassic Park franchise are not REAL dinosaurs even within their own continuity, they are ALL hybrid animals due to the cloning process used by Ingen. As I said the Jurassic Park novel presents the movement based vision as something affecting several different species (and book-Grant was surprised both times he witnessed it), not just Rexy (the full grown T-Rex in Jurassic Park), and unlike Rexy the two T-Rexs in the Lost World novel can see just fine. Taking these things into account it is likely that in the novels the vision issue was a defect caused by the fictional cloning procedure, and this plot point was poorly adapted for the movie as movie-Grant incorrectly states that it is an expected limitation.

@@evilmark443 Whilst you make a good argument, it is the palaeontologist, Alan Grant, that tells everyone about the T-Rex's eyesight, so it is his 'expert' opinion that they can't see movement, even though a real expert (on this video) tells us this is wrong. Dr Grant wasn't told of eye defects in the book or film, so it's just an error by the author that sounded good at the time.

@@Thurgosh_OG But he doesn't do that in the novel, as far as I know, and evilmark443 was pointing out that the issue is better presented in the novel as being a flaw in the cloning process rather than something that would be true of a real T-Rex.

We know so much about the T-rex at this point.. So much focus is put on that single species it's crazy !

@@ledernierutopiste It's one of the most popular dinosaurs out there so it's no surprise that it's the one most researched.

He’s been studying this since he was 5

But how can he possibly know any of this for a fact? He can’t. He is guessing.

@@ledernierutopiste O. We THINK we know. But there is no way to ever know if we are right. I could guess that a T-Rex could speak english and there’s no way anyone could deny it factually because none of us have ever seen a real T-Rex. Just like this guy is guessing. He has no rock solid evidence to back anything up. Paleontology is like predicting weather. A bunch of guessing.

Fantastic movie, but don't go into it expecting to learn much of anything about dinosaurs.

It is not supposed to be accurate.

@@maxonite just because something isn't supposed to be accurate doesn't make it less inaccurate

@@thundercricket4634 unfortunately it seems a lot of people do this…

@@thundercricket4634 That's just plain wrong. First of all, it was because of JP that dinosaurs became popular. Secondly, saying that all JP dinosaurs are innacurate is an exaggeration. Outside of the Dilo not having a frill and venom and the raptors being smaller and feathered, most designs are just fine. Also, the movie has a lot of accurate dinosaur behaviours outside of the Rex vision stuff

Oh man, being a paleontologist has to be one of the only jobs in existence where you get to say you're doing exactly what you wanted to as a kid, right up there with astronaut. Just get to study things that make you giddy, probably spend a good amount of time outdoors, and probably great for party conversation--I mean c'mon, who doesn't like to talk about dinosaurs?!

This episode is based off his podcast episode about dinosaurs in films.

His lectures are fascinating as well.

Ross Geller would've been better

I really wanted to be a paleontologist growing up but it never financially worked out, it's a very long and nowadays very expensive academic career with not much pay. Any paleontologist is extremely passionate about their job because you have to be in order to become one in the first place. I myself have just settled for being an amateur one

You should also check out his podcast; terrible lizards

A good positive energy while also ripping on movies. Probably fun at parties.

check out his Terrible Lizards podcast

Go watch his talk on Tyrannosaurs at the Royal Institute. More of the same; entertaining and very informative.

@@hibernopithecus7500 he's got another RI lecture coming out in a few weeks about Spinosaurus too

Jurassic park does this the least the T-Rex doesn’t make a sound when he attacks the gallinimus and at the end when he sneaks up on the raptor. The raptor also doesn’t make a sound when it sneaks up on Muldoon in the clever girl scene. Raptors are also quiet when they attack the ingen guys in the long grass scene in the lost world.

Yeah, they always roar like mammals, like a tiger or a bear or something.

They do it because it's cool.

@@mowabbThe first 2 Jurassic Park films actually had their dinosaurs behave like animals.

To be fair thats actually not true. When wolves hunt bison for example, they arent the type of animal that is going to sneak up and ambush it like a lion. They run it to exhaustion with their incredible stamina, and they usually begin to pick out a target by spooking the herd. Wolves cant roar but if they could I don't see why they wouldn't for intimidation. So its a thing that they could do, and even write well into a movie. But it would just have to be situational and used with the right animals or dinosaurs.

I didnt either, but I also didn't have much to add to this because he did alot for us, i have three of his books. 2 of them are on the stego and kenta, very descriptive writing.

So he's spectacular in the field, but how is he in the office or lecture hall?

@@Vanastar lol are you a student of his ?

@@Mimi-mq2wj No, I was making a pun joke.

@@Mimi-mq2wj No, I was making a pun joke.

you should check out his podcast Terrible Lizards

Damn straight! "Lots of dinosaurs, few annoying children." Gotta love scientific analysis!

@@iszitube Thanks for the tip!

Yeah idk why but this isnt just in JP, Spielberg for some reasons likes/liked to add annoying children in some of his movies 😅

Yeah we traded the kids in for Amanda Kirby In that movie. The kid in that movie was competent enough to live amongst dinosaurs. His mom was an idiot.

They must've thought they had the dumbest audience ever. I guess that explains why they felt comfortable giving us this nonsense that T. rex can't see you if you hold still.

Spot on mr ghost, my dad used to work in edinburgh zoo when he was young and worked closely with an elephant, she used to creep on him all the time, luckily she knew him and was pretty playful, used to give her polos 🤣 Wild elephant are pretty terrifying if provoked though

@@ByGod72051 yeah, tried to poke an elephant before and i got smashed in the head and died. Not going to try this again

@@arthurlofrano7021 pmsfl jesus christ 😂😂 that was quite funny mate nice one 🙂

I'd say their ability to hear low frequency sounds so much better than us contributes to this. Footsteps create sounds in the lower range, so if they are trying to be quiet, they can hear it much softer than we can.

David Attenborough said that during the pandemic a lot of areas built fast growing decoy plants to keep the elephants out of the human crop I hope that helps with the sneaky elephants.

@@flynnlivescmd Wow, this is like you went down the rage bait troll checklist.

check out his Terrible Lizards podcast

@@iszitube Ooo! Ooo! Their backlog is all over on iszitube 😜

I love his dinosaur comparisons. Being a lifelong dino-nerd, his "corrections" to the JP critters is fascinating to me, but one of his nit-,picks REALLY annoyed me. The guitar-string trick with the water glass was not only top-notch Speilbergian movie magic, but a FANTASTIC bit of suspense leading up to the reveal of the T-Rex!

@@iszitube Thanks so much for mentioning this! I've been thinking I needed more paleontology, zoology, biology podcasts in my life. Will check it out tomorrow for sure!

I want to attend a lecture he is giving.

That bothered me when I saw it too. It just wouldn’t bother hunting or chasing when not hungry. The other stupid part is the whole idiocy of the Indoraptor is that it couldn’t orchestrate that escape. How would it know about the infrared cameras and how to fool them? I also don’t think it could use its camouflage and infrared abilities all at once. It’s an animal, I don’t think it would be smart enough to trick the humans given it can’t understand what the camera is as a concept or what the tracker is for. On top of that it should have been drugged unconscious when implanted. All that aside even if they couldn’t detect it anyone with sense would just wait the few extra minutes to get the location tracker results. Also, why go in to investigate the enclosure anyway? You think it’s climbed out but the fact is you don’t know for sure. Entertaining the enclosure is trying to determine it’s still there or not. That’s a helluva gamble there. Finally why send humans in to investigate? Send a robot or drone instead. Finally only having the only way to get in through the door designed for the animal is stupid. It makes far more sense to build in a tiny doorway only for humans, complete with secure “airlock style” safety doors. Sooner or later humans will need to go inside for maintenance or to vet check the animal. It would have to be totally sedated before anyone would be let in. I could go on but I’ve made my point. Also the raptor trainer… yeah if you can’t reliably order the raptors to stand and wait upon command then they really aren’t responding well to training at all. But I’m not going to be too harsh on the first Jurassic Park movie because I enjoy the vast majority of it. The whole water ripples really helped set up the tension for the T-Rex arrival. Oh and a bonus round, there’s no way the Indoraptor would have random bits of the things like cuttlefish genes in it. Genetic engineering is no joke either and it’s very precise.and the scientist would pick the specific sequences for the purpose they need. There’s almost no way they could even add the infrared changing genes by accident

Indo was a mess. There are even rumors it had human DNA mixed in. Also, she apparently killed her sibling. The movie stated she was way too intelligent and she hunted for sport/fun rather than food and left a trail of bodies in her wake. she was mentally unstable.

but the 'snack' is Naomi Watts. I would chase Naomi Watts no matter how big a dinner I'd just had.

In defense of the Indo, they heavily implied in the movie that the geneticists added human DNA to it and also literally said, "It's hunting for sport". I agree that a real animal wouldn't do that, but the Indo isn't a real animal to begin with. They were implying that the real monsters in all of the movies were the people who played God, not the animals. In terms of the Kong movie, I tend to agree with you. The only thing that could explain this behaviour (emphasized *could*) is if it has a high prey drive- or if its chase instincts kick in when something runs away from it. Kind of like how some dogs act when a squirrel runs away.

Yeah that just pushed the idea that dinosaurs were monster and killers but in reality these are just animals not monsters

The has 2 books about dinosaurs and here in UKposts you can serch his name (David Hone) and the has videos about tyrannosaurus, about Spinosaurus and Baryonyx and dinosaur behavior. I really recommend you all those videos

He has a great podcast called Terrible Lizards where they talk about the physiology of a specific dinosaur every episode

@@borisahsmann7190 where I can find that podcast?

17:23 my favorite part. I just love hearing this guys admiration for Trex and knowing that the experts also hold Trex up very high as much as I do

I do love that he’s like ‘it’s the least interesting thing to theorize about dinosaurs’ but still obviously thought about it enough to have an opinion lol

T. rex

11 year old me was waiting to hear this confirmation.

I laughed out loud, I wasn't expecting an answer LOL

bothered the heck out of me how they’re treated like mindless killing monsters rather than just animals!

On the other hand, they did have large brains, that could compensate for it not being complicated. And, it is a safe assumption they had emotions complicated enough to motivate them, at least sometimes. It is possible that it might have been motivated by vindictiveness toward humans to go after them.

@@TheNoiseySpectator i dont think size of the brain matters at all if it did stegosaurus would be dumb to the point where it would not function and its really too negative thing to push something that big and complex to evolve

@@firegator6853 Are you sure you are not changing the subject? We were talking about Tyrannodons and their family. Do stegosauri fit in with them, on this case?

@@TheNoiseySpectator im not changing it because im explaining about brain size...so what if troodon brain is bigger? doesnt make it clever, and i said with the same logic of size = intellect an example about stegosaurus

We all enjoyed listening to him! He needs to do another one of these!

At the beginning he was excitedly informative, but by the end he was full blown geeking out. He is so much fun to watch!

You mean Jurassic World?

@@darkshat3077 yeah bro, the actual aerodynamics escaped me until this guy points out they actually make no sense 🤣

@@tomtripp5417 having a larger budget doesn’t matter. Jurassic world and land before time aim for different things.

Liitle foot being more scientifically accurate was probably by accident. The animators probably just wanted to make him cuter looking since he was a newborn.

@@GrandInfernoElite Well, thats whats nature trying too, so that the newborn doesnt get eaten by its parents

It is why one of the episodes of Primal is so effective. The antagonist is a sauropod and both protagonists are pretty much completely helpless... Granted it is a horribly macabre episode in general, but it is still something to note.

An angry Titanosaur would be the scariest thing imaginable.

too bad he does't have a good character

@@daegnaxqelil2733 doesn't have a good character? Now what do you mean by that?

Imagine ark giga and ark titanosaur in real life

If you actually watch the scene, the t-rex didn't have a good grip on the spino's neck at all. The spino just shakes a bit and the rex loses its grip. It was also the juvenile rex from the second movie- big enough to stand a chance, but didn't pull through. They also covered up a lot of inaccuracies in the spino by implying that the geneticists in the movies were creating "monsters", not real dinosaurs. This is now a central theme in the new movies. The Mosasaurus is too big for a reason, the Dilophasaurus has a frill and poison for a reason, and the velociraptors on Isla Sorna varied in colours and shapes for a reason. The geneticists are creating "theme park monsters. Nothing more and nothing less". You can also argue that they do this for the sake of more shock value in movies, but it has been confirmed in the canon of JP and JW that the geneticists have mixed animal DNA from the very start. In a real fight with anatomically correct dinosaurs, an adult rex would destroy an adult spino (unless near deep water). But the fact that the geneticists in the movies literally mix and match and make creatures however they want debunks any accurate science people splurge. For all we know, the geneticists decided to make the spino in this movie into a war machine with extremely tough skin and bones 🤷‍♀️ There is literally no way of saying who would 100% win in this match up every time because of missing variables.

@@beatricedorian9908 It had its teeth in as far as they could go, so it had a good grip!

@@beatricedorian9908 it would at least rip it off, like crocodiles do. Once they bite they won’t let go. I don’t think you could get off from a T-Rex once it bited you.

@@beatricedorian9908 Yeah, I can sort of see that. The front teeth aren't fully dug in and this is a juvie rex. However, the rear teeth more than likely are fully dug in. And those are some really nasty teeth - they're essentially railroad spikes with serrated kitchen knife edges on either side cutting flesh. So not only is this bite going to probably compromise the spine by fracturing vertebrae and causing damage to the spinal cord leading to anything between numb extremities to cessation of all functions beneath the bite (as in, lungs stop, heart stops, limbs won't move...) but assuming you could get yourself free from a T-Rex's jaws clamping down on you that means those teeth are yanked out, and it's going to cause a catastrophic bleeding. The Spino would have lasted about as long as to that victorious roar, and then died to blood loss - even if it somehow managed to kill the Rex. Genetics, well yeah maybe so, this is the thing which JP series has used both before and after JP3. But it shouldn't be a "get out of jail free card" so to say. T-Rex could bite through the sides and even the back of an Ankylosaur if it had to, and go look the bone armour they had. An extra thick loose skin might delay the bite for a few seconds at most and maybe give the spino a chance to retalaite with those arms on the Rex's face, but that bite as was portrayed is still absolutely a GG.

I think you are correct when two carnivors are evenly matched in size and strenght. but many carnivors kill off the competition when they are bigger and stronger then the competition. Lions are notorious for killing the cubs of panthers, cheetah's, wild dogs and hyena's given the change.

and here its even more useless because you have spinosaurus...spinosaurus evolved to eat fish exactly for the reason of competition it lives in and near water eating fish and the other out in the main land hunting herbivore dinosaurs any kind of interaction between them is useless unless one of the two finds the chance to snatch on the young of the other or something

@@kamion53 that is not for destroying competition, it's so the lion can absorb their power and become the ultimate predator.

@@kamion53 most carnivors kills cubs even their own specie if they're not their children, or at least not from the same pack

True

Yeah that's definitely in Disney's top 5 most underrated movies.

"Yeah, appliances are not sentient, let alone sapient. But fun movie, 8/10." I summed up the hypothetical video for you.

@@kenjutsukata1o1 “based on all my years of experience and exposure to such appliances, I can safely say they do not express emotions the way the film is depicting. I’ll give it a 7/10 for the similarity in steel” 🤣

I suggest the expert being a child psychologist and make them watch Worthless the whole way through...

@@polnochkoshmary or the blender scene

@@kenjutsukata1o1 "Cars dont sing before they are crushed but now im crying" 9/10

Our film industry should reflect his wisdom

It's all theory. No one has seen a living dinosaur.

@@morongene it's data extrapolation. we observe animals that have xyz characteristics, we find fossil records displaying xy characteristics and we assume z about them.

@@dietotaku ASSUME, aka a theory.

@@morongene there is a really big difference between a guess and a educated guess. Like asking a child and a automotive designer to draw a car. :P

I might of not have been born when the movie came out, but It did become a childhood film due to my mom having the VHS. Love Land Before Time so much.

Land Before Time is one of my all time favorites.

Yeah. I was annoyed at the story and the narrator, but I liked the dinosaurs and the animation.

My favourite movie when I was little

Is The land before time the one with "Little foot"?? If so I used to own a few on VHS when I was veeeryy young and used to watch nearly every weekend

@kshamwhizzle Well, I'm not because those horror movies were made by people just trying to make money. Dinosaurs are animals, not monsters. 🦖

@@maxleroux the books and movies do depict them as animals many times. Like the parental instincts of the two rexes to look out for their child, or in the books it is explicitly stated that the raptors behave erratically because they grew up without adults showing them how to behave in a social environment. The books go into lots of detail with the animals, because what the dinosaurs in jurassic park really are, is genetically enginneres theme-park monsters that have little in common with the actual animals. That is why they are inaccurate.

@@ohsheee6600 well said! Dinosaurs had their chance. John Hammond patented it and packaged it and slapped it on a lunchbox.

@@maxleroux it is literally a fictional book series about the disasters man kind makes in the name of science

@@maxleroux literally what the entire point of the first movie was

yes same!! it was one of my favs when I was a kid!

Same here. I love that movie as a kid and I still do.

Same here as well. I remember I used to watch it every single day after I got back from school, and never got tired of it. It was just sad that Disney did not make a sequel to this masterpiece.

Honestly, that movie's pretty underrated imho. The plot may not be all that great, but the visuals were incredible. I absolutely adored it as a kid!

It's underrated, and the scene in question is epic.

Also spitting cobras inject venom with out puncturing with fangs specifically through eyes sockets, just like the jp dilo.

Novel was genuis

yea, I was one of those dinosaur nerds when I was a kid, watched every dinosaur documentary and every dinosaur book and my mother used to tell me they never existed just to make me nerd rage 😂

Your father was right.

LOL 🤣 I feel ya. I was that guy too....still am really.

god that's so relatable.

He's very popular (for palaeontology standards lol) on Twitter and he has a few talkings and presentations here on UKposts as well. Dr. David Hone is quite a funny guy :)

@@IceSpoon Howdy to a fellow David Hone enjoyer :)

That was a pretty big retcon, but also a wink-wink to the advances of science. It was also the only interesting thing in the abomination called "Jurassic World"

​@@dirtyharry1881 Retcon? Hardly. It might as well be a direct quote from the first book. Hammond had them modifying species from the start, including making them faster IRC, to match audience expectations. They're already Franken-dinosaurs from all the controls they've engineered into their biology. There never were any "dinosaurs" in Jurassic Park really... just another flea-circus selling imagination.

Probably what VFX artists said to their directors

@@dirtyharry1881 what do you mean big retcon? that exact scene from Jurassic World was adapted from the first novel of Jurassic Park. in the book wu says the exact thing only to Hammond instead of Simon masroni. also Jurassic World is good and so are the other 2 movies

@@citrusreality64 No, he says that's what they wanted to make to appeal to the public, but Wu INSISTS that the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park are as real as possible.

HAve you ever suprised a bear in the woods? Because at least 4 times me and my dog shocked a bear and got roared at, before I had to let my dog tree the bear and we could leave. They don't really roar at prey, you are right. They roar at things they aren't sure about/territory disputes.

As fictional as Godzilla is It's explained that Godzilla roars when hunting to display dominance

@@thedarkapex5327 Godzilla isn't even supposed to be a dinosaur right? Just a massive supernatural reptile

@@EspeonMistress00 He is a dinosaur He was only supernatural in one film in all the others he is an undiscovered species of dinosaurs that was mutated by radiation from the Hiroshima bomb or one of the atomic bomb tests in the pacific in the new movies he is a dinosaur that was mutated by the earth's natural radiation.

Why?? They arnt dinosaurs...

@@pheonixfire9517 there are a few that are based off of dinosaurs like the Anjanath is basically a fluffy T-Rex.

Let him inspect Pickle boy and anjanath 😂

I love the JP and JW movies but I really wish they used Utah Raptor instead of Velociraptor. I understand Velociraptor is the "cooler" name. But had they used Utah Raptor as the name for the Raptors they would be 100% correct (outside of any visual differences we may not know about)

@@kylelyons1939 the utahraptor was discovered after the first movie came out. The velociraptor was probably just used for the name and was scaled up for the danger. Now it's just too iconic to switch out.

@@GrandInfernoElite absolutely too iconic now. But hmm I didn't know Utah Raptor wasn't discovered yet at that point. I wasnt born till 1997 when the lost world released anyways.

Oh absolutely, Nedry's death was so much more graphic in the book to the point you felt a little bit sorry for him especially when they find his corpse later on

@@kylelyons1939 most people get it wrong. It's not Velociraptor mongoliensis they're showing in the movie, the small one with a long snout. It makes no sense that they would dig up a Mongolian dinosaur in Montana. It's Velociraptor antirrhopus they based them on, which was later reassigned Deinonychus antirrhopus. Indeed the ones in the movie are bigger than the real thing, but the blockynes and shape are about right for the time and the size much closer to the actual creature than to V. mongoliensis. They didn't change the name in the movies for continuity most likely.

That was/is a dope series

Full of propaganda that was

@@CaptainUncle1836 please elaborate? :)

@@olivera6743 I too request some elaboration.

Ayooooo BBC?