New Dinosaur species discovered

[Naked Snake]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=9&u=/ap/20030814/ap_on_sc/india_dinosaurs_3

I just love ripping stuff from Fark. Anyway, I think it's interesting how we're still discovering new things on our planet, and how we'll most likely continue to. What do you guys think of this?

[Kid Airbag]

I think there's no such things as dinosaurs.

[CyRaptor]

Nothing overly special really, new Dinosaur species are described every few weeks. Of course, it's nice to see a new authentic genus like this one every once in a while. The really interesting discoveries, IMO, are the ones that expand upon already discovered species, like the Dromaeosaur with feather imprints from a year or two ago. Although the feathered Dromaeosaur theory had been floating around for the past twenty years, it was some of the first solid evidence.

[Disorder]

Looks like a mean killer to me (the dino, not the man). Time for a new Jurassic Park :)

[Naked Snake]

Disorder said:

Looks like a mean killer to me (the dino, not the man). Time for a new Jurassic Park :)

Ugh, Jurassic Park and its sequals were terrible. Hopefully, they'll learn their damn lesson and stop at 3.

[AndrewB]

Response 1: Especially how the computer graphics got worse with each sequel. What the heck??

Response 2: Should have stopped at 1.

[Fletcher`]

Blah all you will. I thought the Jurassic trilogy was pretty good.

[sargebaldy]

BBG said:

Ugh, Jurassic Park and its sequals were terrible. Hopefully, they'll learn their damn lesson and stop at 3.

um, no. only the movies were bad. jurassic part and lost world were both good books (there wasn't even a third one).

[Sharessa]

AndrewB said:

Response 1: Especially how the computer graphics got worse with each sequel. What the heck??

Response 2: Should have stopped at 1.

I agree with AndrewB here.

Yeah but anyway, new dinosaur species will probably be found constantly, because pretty much every fossil they find is a new species. 99.9% of all remains are destroyed after 100 million years, these are the lucky few who survive. The few we have multiple fossils of were the prevelant ones, like house sparrows, dogs, European starlings, and humans are today: found everywhere in the world, and in large numbers. Hard for there NOT to be surviving remains under such circumstances. :P But yeah, when a new species is found, we're lucky to get a glance.

[dsm]

BBG said:

Ugh, Jurassic Park and its sequals were terrible. Hopefully, they'll learn their damn lesson and stop at 3.

The books were superb - got lots of inspiration from them and I still read them now and again.
But this just goes to show how Hollywood is able to fuck up even a written story.

[sargebaldy]

dsm said:

The books were superb - got lots of inspiration from them and I still read them now and again.
But this just goes to show how Hollywood is able to fuck up even a written story.

hollywood SPECIALIZES in fucking up written stories =P the only time a book ever makes a good movie is when the author of the book is the screenwriter for the movie or otherwise significantly involved in the movie production (the 25th hour, fight club) or the director just really kicks ass (the shining).

[Disorder]

BBG said:

Hopefully, they'll learn their damn lesson and stop at 3.

Hahahahaha.

[Sharessa]

sargebaldy said:

hollywood SPECIALIZES in fucking up written stories =P the only time a book ever makes a good movie is when the author of the book is the screenwriter for the movie or otherwise significantly involved in the movie production (the 25th hour, fight club) or the director just really kicks ass (the shining).

The Shining was cool, but apparently Stephen King hated it.

One movie that is as good as the book is A Clockwork Orange. The only major discrepency is the lack of the final chapter in the movie, but that chapter kinda mucks the story up, so heh...

[Fletcher`]

The Abyss was pretty good, but it was a novelization. (considering that it was being written while the movie was made)

[zark]

Michael Crichton's Sphere was a damn good book... pity the movie sucked.

The first Jurassic Park movie I thought was pretty good. Never seen the 2nd one, the 3rd one is quite terrible.

[NiGHTMARE]

AndrewB said:

Should have stopped at 1.

Nope, should have stuck with 0.

[sargebaldy]

the_Danarchist said:

The Shining was cool, but apparently Stephen King hated it.

yeah, it's unlike the book apparently. a friend of mine hated it just for that. but it's a good movie of it's own right, quite a bit better than the miniseries version stephen king directed (that was accurate obviously).

[Shaviro]

For me:

Jurassic park 1: A true classic
Jurassic park 2: Ok
Jurassic park 3: Bad

[geekmarine]

Ugh, Jurassic Park 4. I think I'm gonna be sick. I mean, I completely agree with Shaviro as far as the series is concerned. The first one was a great movie, if you just ignore the book it was based on. The second one wasn't as good, but it wasn't really flawed, either. The third one was just terrible.

[Disorder]

I loved the first one. The second and the third are equally retarded storywise. But it's still fun if you simply expect nothing more than a Hollywood popcorn flick.

[sargebaldy]

even the first one was trash if you compare it to the book. i was highly disappointed. the second movie was a joke, never watched the third.

[GS-1719]

I thought the first was okay, the second highly flawed but still watchable to a degree. The third was a joke - morons using science as an excuse for another sequel.

[Fredrik]

JP is good, the rest are meh. But I'm not the first one to say that so bleh.

[Grazza]

sargebaldy said:

even the first one was trash if you compare it to the book.

OMG, I agree with sargebaldy about something. :p

After I read the book of Jurassic Park, I thought "well that's something they'll never be able to make a movie out of". That wasn't because I thought the special effects would be impossible, but because film is the wrong medium to capture the essence of what the book was getting at. Still, a "oooh, look at the pretty dinosaurs - OMG they eat people" approach seemed to work well enough from a commercial viewpoint, and it was quite entertaining.

Any other Crichton novels that people like? ;)

[Fredrik]

Grazza said:

Any other Crichton novels that people like? ;)

Apart from Jurassic Park, I've only read Sphere and The Andromeda Strain. Both are good, Sphere is better though.

[IMJack]

The first JP book was good. The first JP movie was good for different reasons. The second JP book was written because the first movie had done so well, and it's all downhill from there.

[Tyockell]

Looks like a heavier built version of the Ceratosaurus with that pronounced horn and the stubby snout reminds me of a pitbull or something it would deffinatly have really high jaw pressure. Thats pretty sweet though thats a mayjor find large carnivores like that dont pop up to often.

[deldelda]

BBG said:

Ugh, Jurassic Park and its sequals were terrible. Hopefully, they'll learn their damn lesson and stop at 3.

And maybe another dinosaur trilogy, the Land Before Time, will stop at 8,932.

I, too, think it looks like a beefed-up Ceratosaurus, or maybe a T-Rex, but not as big. Like a mini-t-rex.

[Ed]

The first Land Before Time kicked ass..

[Amaster]

Books: The first JP was phenominal. The second was quite enjoyable.

Movies:
JP1: Excellent. Too bad so much from the book had to be scrapped.
JP2: Fucking awful.
JP3: I didnt bother seeing this in the theatre. I rented it and watched it alone, yet I still felt embarrased to be watching it.

Edit: I just remembered that when I first saw JP1, I was really impressed with the bassy T-Rex roar. In JP2 they replaced it with a trebble filled screech which was, once again, fucking awful!