OT Elon Musk's Business Partner Says A Real Jurassic Park Can Be Done

A friend took me to see the movie and I drove him nuts pointing out all the scientific inaccuracies. He said it's science fiction, but science fiction should get the science right.

 

Yeah... let’s not go there.

 

Prove it...

 

I don't know enough about biology to speak intelligently but the explanation in the movie seemed plausible to me.

 

DNA is just not well preserved in amber.
A mosquito would have blood of multiple animals of many species. To separate it by species is not biologically impossible but technologically daunting.
They filled the gaps with frog DNA but frogs and dinosaurs are not closely related at all. Biologically impossible.
T Rex was so heavy the earth vibrated when she walked but much heavier brontosaurus didn't make earth vibrate.
TRex had fearsome roar, but dinosaurs did not have vocal chords.
Nothing is known about dinosaur eyes, so the story line that Tyrannosaurus could only see moving objects is pure invention.
They made all the dinosaurs female do they wouldn't reproduce, but many reptile species can be parthenogenic, meaning females can reproduce on their own. Better to make them all male and neuter at birth.
The little girl was a vegetarian but she ate Jello, an animal product.

 

You forgot the part where they get zapped by the electrical fence and a few chest compressions and assisted breathing wake him right up. That part always annoyed me.

 

I was taught in the Army to not move when spotted by an enemy flare at night because movement was more readily detected by humans. I believe animals similarly have improved vision of their prey when it moves which I think I may have seen in one of the many nature shows I have watched.
Also, wasn't T-Rex a dinosaur and didn't it have a voice box?
I got this off the internet:
"However, vegetarian jello desserts made from plant-based gums or seaweeds like agar or carrageenan are available." Brand name Jello is not vegan and is made from the .
Frogs are related to reptiles as were dinosaurs. I can accept a certain similarity especially since I know that bananas share about 41% of their DNA with humans. Even if it is a stretch to think that frogs share critical DNA with T-Rex I can go with it for the pure entertainment value of a hair raising action movie. Oh come on, it was fun.

I had a friend in college who's father was an electrician who worked at the Bonneville dam. One day he shut off the power to a generator so he could work on it. Then while he was performing maintenance on the generator some nimrod saw the power switch turned off and decided he'd do a good job and turn the switch so that power would be restored to run the generator. My friend's dad got thrown across the room but lived. I've also heard stories about people getting hit with lightening who've lived. In conclusion I think there's a possibility that the movie version could theoretically happen. Sometimes when the skin is extra conductive with body salt mixed with sweat or other water, the surge of electricity can be channeled across the surface of the skin thereby bypassing the vital organs. That I do know something about.

 

Frogs are amphibians. Dinosaurs were reptiles. I share more DNA with my cat (we are both mammals).
No, vocal chords do leave attachment points in bone and they did not have vocal chords.
Stegosuarus was extinct by the time Tyrannosaurus arrived.

 

The dichotomy of the arrival of the T-Rex and the extinction of the Stegosaurus would not be a problem at such a park. Animals and plants could be reconstructed from different periods in the Mesozoic era.
Also, how do you explain the voice box?

 

This explains why Elon Musk is investing so heavily in SpaceX. He wants an escape pod when the dinosaurs break out.

 

Terrible wingspan.

 

As ambush hunters, I suspect they'd just lunge for steals all game.

 

T-Rex didn't like confrontation. I don't think it had the toughness to eat the other players if it was out on a court with everyone staring at it.

 

Thing is, you can't have it both ways. You can't say it's entertainment so doesn't matter if it's scientifically accurate, and at the same time it could happen based on science.
I recently read Fire, Ice, and Physics, about the science in Game of Thrones. Author demonstrated why fire breathing dragons are impossible. OK, it's fantasy. So don't say maybe someone would have three fire breathing dragons.

 

I think good science fiction needs to hew close enough to real science that it's at least plausible-sounding, even if there are flaws that make it not realistic in reality. I think Jurassic Park is good science fiction in that regard--it's close enough to plausible that it doesn't feel like the author is just introducing a magical macguffin (in my opinion).

But I agree that you can't then turn around that say, "We could actually do this." We can't actually do this--we're bending science a bit to create a satisfying plot, but bending it enough that it's not actually a real thing.