Hey, I've been struck with a novel thought regarding the issue with the JP Velociraptors being highly inaccurate compared to the real-life dinosaur in terms of size. You know how in the novels, the JP raptors are implied to be based by Crichton on Achillobator giganticus
(which, besides being apparently misidentified as just another Velociraptor species at the time of its initial discovery, is practically a perfect fit for the JP raptors in proportions), while the movies imply that the raptors were instead based on Deinonychus (which, while considerably larger than the real-life V. mongoliensis, still falls quite short of the JP animal's size) due to its specific name of antirrhopus being tacked on to the Velociraptor species' binomial name in lieu of mongoliensis?
Well, consider that the Galapagos tortoise
is the only species in its genus to be so gigantic; its sister species are quite diminutive in comparison. This sets a precedent for a single genus having such a size disparity among its member species. So... What if InGen scientists made dinosaur clones from what they thought to be V. mongoliensis DNA samples, and ended up with specimens of both the small V. mongoliensis and the huge Achillobator giganticus, then did a DNA analysis on said specimens to find out what the hell is going on, and discovered that the Achillobator genome is so similar to the V. mongoliensis one that the two are obviously members of the same genus?
JP!World, prepare to reclassify Achillobator giganticus as Velociraptor achillobator!
edited 20th Aug '15 6:57:48 AM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.Not just the films.
- Deinonychus is the only member of the dromaeosauridae family with observed social behavior. The idea that raptors are pack hunters is taken from a group of deinonychus skeletons found surrounding a tenontosaur. Achillobator is a solitary hunter.
- The dig site in Montana where Dr. Grant is uncovering "raptor" fossils in both film and book is the Yale quarry in Cloverly, where the aforementioned deinonychus pack was found. This is the site where deinonychus was first discovered. Achillobator skeletons have only ever been discovered in Mongolia and Russia, far from Grant's place of business.
- Michael Crichton consulted with John Ostrom
for details about the deinonychus for the animal's depiction in Jurassic Park.
Like the Utahraptor claims some years back, the only reason people think achillobator is the correct dinosaur is because it's a large member of the dromaeosauridae family. The raptors are not achillobators, despite what the JP Wiki might like to insist.
edited 20th Aug '15 7:58:16 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Well, Velociraptor Anythingus is clearly not the right species anyway. No actual velociraptor genus came anywhere near the size of the JP raptors though other dromeosaurs did (the whole 'smart as chimps nonsense aside) which is where all the fanon arguments come from.
My own personal theory is basically that whatever the heck the JP raptors actually are is a species that never actually existed in real life. It's not an Achillobator, a Utahraptor, Deinonychus or anything we've found. It only ever existed in JP world.
"These 'no-nonsense' solutions of yours just don't hold water in a complex world of jet-powered apes and time travel."They don't need to be a new species. Jurassic Park has a built-in excuse for any and all scientific inaccuracy in its basic premise: the hybrid DNA, established as early as the very first novel and film. It's the same reason Rexie has motion-based vision, dilophosaurs have acid spit, and the spinosaurus is everything about the spinosaurus. Both Drs. Grant and Wu even call this out in JP 3 and JW, respectively.
GRANT: What John Hammond and InGen did at Jurassic Park was to create genetically-engineered theme park monsters. Nothing more and nothing less.
edited 20th Aug '15 10:05:57 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Which is precisely why trying to argue the 'real' base species that has been altered is so spectacularly missing the point. It ISN'T any real dromeosaur. There are none that size, with that speed, group behaviour and ape-level intelligence. It has no feathers which pretty much every dromeosaur save possibly the very largest most probably would have done. It's purely and totally a chimera cobbled together by Hammond's crew of scientists.
And as such, making the base species an entirely fictitious dromeosaur solves all the problems of working out what the heck the DNA was before Wu and Co. got to work, because turning a predatory turkey into a six foot tall killing machine is really, really stretching my credulity even with JP science.
"These 'no-nonsense' solutions of yours just don't hold water in a complex world of jet-powered apes and time travel."No, it isn't accurately any dromaeosaur. It's still based on an existing dinosaur the same way that the tyrannosaurus and the dilophosaurus are. Making it an entirely fictional animal from the ground up defeats the purpose.
Unlike the other animals in the series, the velociraptor specifically is a subject of debate because the animal it's based on is not the one it's named after. The tyrannosaurus is not an accurate depiction of a tyrannosaurus but it was still meant to be a tyrannosaurus. The velociraptor, however, was meant to be a deinonychus. No part of it ever had anything to do with velociraptors.
edited 20th Aug '15 10:29:21 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Not quite. There are other evidences they intended it to be an Achillobator. For example, it was specifically mentioned the Velociraptor of the park were a "Mongolian species". I made a post about it a while back, but forgot most of it. Point is, the novel and the movies pretty much mixed the Achillobator and Deinonychus together and called it a Velociraptor.
I'm not sure that's evidence of it being achillobator, though. While it's true that the achillobator is discovered in Mongolia and Russia, Mongolia is also where the velociraptor was found. Its scientific name is Velociraptor Mongoliensis as a consequence. Thus, velociraptor is a Mongolian species of velociraptor.
edited 20th Aug '15 10:37:52 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.![]()
There were other stuff too, like the Achillobator being much closer in size to the movie/book Velociraptor, unlike the Utahraptor, which is much larger. We had this discussion before, remember? There was charts and everything. You agreed that they probably based the physical attributes on the Achillobator and everything else on the Deinonychus.
Achillobator wasn't named until 1999, so while they could've possibly based it on a then-unnamed taxon, I doubt they actually did.
edited 20th Aug '15 10:55:16 AM by Spinosegnosaurus77
Peace is the only battle worth waging.The first Achillobator fossil was discovered in 1989, though. The JP novel came out the very next year in November, so there was at least a year-long gap between the discovery and Crichton publishing the final version of the novel.
But giganticus is a specific name, not a generic name. Regardless of what happens to the genus, the species stays (unless it ends up belonging to another species).
[citation needed]
Peace is the only battle worth waging.The sheer size of the JP velociraptors means they cannot possibly be velociraptors at all. They most certainly are of the same family and general design but on an entirely different scale.
"These 'no-nonsense' solutions of yours just don't hold water in a complex world of jet-powered apes and time travel."Velociraptors also were not pack hunters, nor were they found in Montana.
Because they're deliberately mislabeled deinonychus. Crichton just went with the name velociraptor because he thought it sounded cooler.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Best depiction of real velociraptors shows up in Coelasquid's webcomic, "Manly things for manly guys". In which they're adorable feathery fuzzy turkey sized balls of squee. That can still kill you if they attack you in packs.
Oops, that should be "Manly guys doing Manly Things."
edited 20th Aug '15 1:12:47 PM by TamH70
No, I mean because it sounded cooler
.
The raptors are in no way based on Utahraptor or Achillobator (which are over four times as heavy as the JP raptors). They are Deinonychus (highly inaccurate ones).
Everything about the Spinosaurus? Not quite. I've said this a thousand times but I'll say it again: spinosaurs may have eaten fish but that doesn't make them wimps. If you are used to eating great-white shark prey that are major predators in themselves, the fact said prey are fish makes no difference whatsoever.
If anything the JP spinosaur is weaker than the real deal. It's smaller, has a lot less muscle, and a much weaker set of jaws.
By the same token I could say everything about the T. rex is inaccurate: it was quite a (over)specialized hunter in real life.
edited 21st Aug '15 11:12:59 AM by Bk-notburgerking

I bet you can find that on Deviantart within ten minutes.