Massive thank you to Joe for lending his dinosaur expertise to this video! What other dinosaur related movies or games would you like for him to react to? And for even more videos like this one, make sure to check out our Expert Reacts playlist! ua-cam.com/play/PLraFbwCoisJDJlDKavZ05eNKT9jb7wOrO.html
Wrong bro they find 2 Meter raptor but OK And? They modified U read the books 👍😂 No dinosaur is the real one The spinosauros Form the 3 move He is total modfi 😂👍 But in the movies they don't tell it so much But the books my homi red the books And accept testify from the maker hahaha
THANK YOU FOR ACKNOWLEDGING that first initial bite from the T-Rex in Jurassic Park 3 would've severely injured and possibly even killed the Spinosaurus. FINALLY JUSTICE for Rexy!
Keep in mind, even in the movies and books, they acknowledge that due to Cloning process and subsequent genetic engineering the dinosaurs seen in the story are not exactly “authentic.”
true, even in JW is told himself said, "These Animals would Look Really different if they're Pure, but you don't want authenticity, You Want MORE TEETH"
Actually, in the original JP book, Wu goes to Hammond and says that they actually do have “real” dinos, but Wu doesn’t think that it’s what the public will want to see. And he recommends to Hammond that they should basically “dumb” them down and make them more like what the general public expects to see. And Hammond emphatically tells Wu no. He wants them authentic.
@Arushi Mittal exactly! And Wu actually gets kind of excited in the books that the dinos are able to reproduce in the wild because it means he really got it right if all of the "hardware," shall we say, is able to work on its own in the wild.
also the raptor fossil is also inaccurate sooooooo. That has no in universe explanation, it has the out of universe explanation of some palaeontologists applying deinonychus to the velociraptor, but that was pretty much a fringe theory. But Crichton thought it sounded more dramatic, which it did to be fair.
I’m glad this paleontologist realized Spielberg just and crichton reversed the names with deinonychus. The last paleontologist react with “Insider” never brought that up and just assumed it was just an exaggeration of the actual velociraptor. This happens way to often and it’s a little irritating. Everyone always thinks the velociraptors are based off the real thing and in truth they were actually modeled after the closely related dromaeosaurid Deinonychus. The movies, and book, Steven Spielberg and Michael Crichton felt to swap the names between the two species because, everyone felt “velociraptor” sounded a lot more dramatic.
it wasn't reversed per se. He used deinonychus, Grant digging in north america gives that away, it's just Spielberg used the same sources Michael Crichton did in Gregory S Paul who was testing out new genus nomenclature. What Paul did is just rename Deinonychus antirrhopus to Velociraptor antirrhopus since Velo was the "patriarch" raptor species between the two in the fossil record--aka the first known. Paul even provided artwork that was used in the film in Grant's trailer. Paul abandoned the practice a few years later and people forgot this is what the filmmakers and crichton did back in the day. Btw, no, in the novel they were also called velociraptor because crichton used paul as well in addition to that purported "better sounding name" story.
also, at the time of Crichton writing the novel, some popular dinosaur books featured 'Deinonychus' as a sub-species of 'Velociraptor' (classified as 'Velociraptor antirrhopus')
Funny enough that Utahraptor was named as the movie was filming. Of course Utahraptor would still be even bigger than the raptors in the film with a total length of 20-25’+ and weighing as much as a adult polar bear! Since then other giant dromeosaurids have been described such as Dakotaraptor, Achillobator, Austroraptor and few other unnamed species known from scant remains. I’m sure there where still even bigger dromeosaurs that awaits discovering and description.
Typically apex predators have extraordinary eyesight. The fact that the T-Rex had minuscule upper limbs only means it relies more heavily on its other features. Which are the powerful jaws and it’s eyes. So the idea that t-Rex 🦖 couldn’t see stationary objects as prey is absurd.
@@MrTroodon_Official what's crazy is that they current estimate is that those tiny arms could still manipulate objects up to 400lbs. So while little and probably not used often, they could still be dangerous.
8:18 has got to be my favorite of the raptor vocalizations in the films, that braying trumpet of a roar followed by that chittering still sends a chill down my spine to this day, in the best possible way haha such cool sound design.
8:04 - In fact, the reason Jurassic Park's doors have HANDLES instead of KNOBS is because during the making of the film, they did enough research to know that Deinonychus couldn't have turned a knob, so they had the doors use handles that it could push down without turning its wrists. The more you know!
My only problem with people critiquing JP is they don't take into consideration that they're genetically modified. None of them are 100% so they have gain some extra traits from the animals used to fill in the gaps in their DNA.
And some dinosaurs were made genetically to made to look cooler. The dilophosaurus frill was most likely frilled lizard dna in it, and the venom most likely being a mixture of spitting cobra dna and other animals.
Doesn't stop the franchise from pretending that they are 100%. Afterall, all the "Dinosaur Rights" characters are saying "de-extinct", as if the animals are exactly the same as they were millions of years ago. The criticisms are valid.
@@muhammedzayan4399 They really don't. Claire even has a big speech in Fallen Kingdom about the "first time you see a dinosaur", as if seeing the skeletons in a museum isn't seeing an actual one, but seeing the cloned variation is. Further, the Dinosaur Protection Group again repeatedly says "de-extinct" and refers to the animals going "extinct all over again". That sort of language would not apply to genetic experiments that do not entirely match their genetic ancestors. So again, the criticism is valid.
In the novel, the excuse behind the Trexs vision being based on movement was actually the result of the tree frog DNA as frogs can only see in the movement. Grant theorized this after the following morning, the kids saw a parasaurolophus eating from the thicket they were hiding in but it didn't see them despite being right in front of it. Also, there was a juvenile Trex with Rexy, but she on the other hand could see just fine.
Tree frogs can see movement. They wouldn’t be able to function if they couldn’t. They are SPECIALIZED at picking up on movement and reacting to it quickly, but they can see things that don’t move.
7:27 Note: The only known possibly venomous dinosaur was Sinornithosaurus, based on pockets inside the upper jaw that might have contained glands that connected to the grooved upper teeth.
Can you imagine a 20 foot dilophosaurus running towards you with that vicious screaming shriek 😱 Edit: Also, can we get this guy in the next jurassic park movie to play Grant's long lost son?
The reason why the T. rex and Jurassic park can't see movement is because it has froggy in it because they found the mosquito and the & amber samples but they didn't have the complete Ginam and they need something else so that used frog diner don't feeling ditty and sequence caps
In the book the dilophosaur is bigger. It picks him up by the head and carries him off. The reason its smaller in the film is so it doesnt take the limelight from the raptors and t rex
To be fair, in Cricton's original Lost World novel, that whole "eyesight based on movement" comes back to litetally bite the poor sap who tried to utilise this idea! And most plot points in 3 were recycled from unused plot points from Cricton's two novels anyway! The river boat, the raptors at the beach at the end, raptors & eggs, a second apex predator and even stealthy carnotaurus!
1:30 This is one of the biggest mistakes people have on these movies, the Velociraptor found in this place called Montana used to be called Velociraptor antirrhopus, now rightfully known as Deinonychus antirropus, the reason why the famous dog sized Velociraptor is confused with the Jurassic Park Velociraptor is because they are two different species, this is because the dog sized Velociraptor was found in Mongolia, NOT Montana, that beingsaid, the Jurassic Park Velociraptor is a Deinonychus antirrhopus and the real Velociraptor is called Velociraptor mongoliensis.
Sounds disingenuous since dilos were mid-sized animals much bigger than raptors, so they were already different enough. They probably just thought making it small and unassuming would enhance the shock effect of the sudden reveal of the frill and venomous spit
Atm the best approach to feathers on Trex would be something similar to elephant hair, small not very visible filaments all through the body. It was a really big animal so large amounts of big feathers are very very unlikely
@@richardhesutton putting "lmfao" at the end of your statement like it's some obviously well known fact just makes it seem like you just googled it real quick to try and sound smarter than other people
@@richardhesutton they aren't small or sparse. it is all over the body and some are close to a foot in size. the skin samples also have been known to be pebbly/scaly for nigh on 20 years (a sample was attempted to be sold back in 2003). you just sound daft with your response.
I'm surprised this guy supported the idea that raptors hunted in packs, and kept referring to it being very credible and believable. Since not a single raptor fossil has actually been found with others, unlike many other fossils. This would suggest that they did not hunt in packs, but were more like lone hunters, hunting independently.
How come most people don't acknowledge that the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park aren't 100% real dinosaur? Yeah, they have dino DNA in them, but other DNA in there too. Dr. Wu even says in Jurassic World that if they were 100% real dinosaur some of them would look quite different.
The best bit of writing in Jurassic Park was the "Frog DNA Splicing" because they knew that what we know about dinosaurs was always changing. This can account for most present and future inaccuracies. In JP3 Dr. Grant even called them "Monsters" and said they where not dinosaurs.
Fun fact, many animals can open doors like that and it doesn't require wrist rotation. That is just the way humans do it. That's like saying "X animal can't open this because it has no fingers." As the octopus opens the jar right behind them lol
dont care what he is saying but , just on the spirit of dominion trailer release : just speechless for the trailer , been waiting for it and man just wanted to see it now , just no words !!
The confusion between the Velociraptor and Deinonychus comes probably from a book. If you read the (still) excellent "predatory dinosaur of the world" of Gregory Paul, you see some curious classification (Daspletosaurus-Tyrannosaurus, Yangchuanosaurus-Metriacanthosaurus and more interestingly for us Deinonychus become Velociraptor anthirropus. We now know that it seems that Deinonychus seems to be more likely Dromaeosaurinae not velociraptorinae. The Paul's classification is than doubtfull. All the best.
Not trying to be mean, but the reason the velociraptor was to big is because that’s how big it was in the novel. And same for the rex, it was also like that in the novel.
Also at the time the novel was written deinonychus was referred to as velociraptor antirhopus (not sure that’s entirely the right word) as opposed to modern velociraptor being velociraptor mongoleinsis (not sure that’s spelled right) Also the velociraptors held their hands that way because of the limitations of a person controlling the puppets for the claws
@@benlussetto7443 you are 99.9% right. antirrhopus with 2 Rs...but besides that absolutely correct. Also mongoliensis. first person i've come across that got these particular facts right.
One thing really that they messed up, but didnt know at the time, is spinosaurus was actually quadrapedal, not bipedal. A few years after this movie came out, they discovered a more complete speicmen with more intact leg bones and thusly we found they would have been far more squat. We know that as the egyptian estuaries dried up, they began to move inland and compete with extremely large theropods for more terrestrial prey, from tooth marks in local herbivores matching spinosaur teeth. So they might have had an idea how to tangle with a T rex, but the T rex was far more suited for fending off a spinosaurus than a spinosaurus would be able to handle a T rex.
@@franciscozapata7625 thats what we used to think. But then we found more complete spinosaurus fossils and it was a more squat, quadrapedal predator. Which makes the fact that it started venturing out onto land to hunt large prey when the estuaries and swamps of egypt began drying out all the more crazy.
@@franciscozapata7625 what? The tail is flat and paddle shaped, tha has nothing to do with the leg structure. You telling me crocodiles have to be bipedal because their tails are flat?
Nothing in Jurassic World is natural! We have always filled gaps in the genomes with the DNA of other animals and if there 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
Dinosaurs lived sixty five million years ago. What is left of them is fossilised in the rocks, and it is in the rock that real scientists make real discoveries! What John Hammond and InGen did at Jurassic Park is create genetically engineered theme park monsters! Nothing more and nothing less. -Dr. Alan Grant
How accurate was the information used at the time the film was made. Original Jurassic park was made in 1993 If you say the movie is wrong because of something learned in 2014 that's not really fair.
It’s actually an embarrassment how the movies after the lost world just turned the Dino’s into cliche movie monsters vs them just being animals doing their thing.
New evidence shows that trex might not have been covered in feathers. More like quills or fuzz but not explicitly feathers. Maybe a combination of the two or three
15:03 Spinosaurus was not bigger than a Trex, it was longer. Spinosaurus was a slender animal and Trex was much more robust, and since size is determined by mass not weight then Trex was indeed bigger, that’s why a hippo is bigger than an anaconda even though the anaconda is longer.
The hippo vs anaconda is a little bit of a disingenuous comparison. "Bigger" in not exactly the most scientifically accurate descriptor of size. It would be more like comparing a Rhino vs a Giraffe. Rhino is heavier, but Giraffe is taller. And comparing the size depends on if you are considering "big" to be height or weight.
Why does he say T. rex was mostly covered in feathers when we have actual skin imprints that clearly show it was largely covered with scales? It had cousins that lived in colder climates that were feathered like Yutyrannus, but T. rex isn't generally thought to be feathered today.
in my knowledge t rex skin not covered in feather most likely to resemble elephant with few more feather in some area and if you want imagine what dinosaur sound just hear cassowaries most likely what we got close to reality
Have you not watched the movies? In the T-Rex breakout scene, the T-Rex is exploring its environment like any other animal would. In the second movie, we see dinosaurs protecting their young, examples being the stegosaurs and the T-Rex pair. This argument can be made in the cause of JPIII, but for all of the other movies, there is usually a completely valid explanation for an animals behavior. These movies have done a lot to portray these marvelous animals as something other than monsters.
fun fact, the veliciraptors in jurassic park were based on the deinonychus., not the veliciraptor. please consider this before making any judgement. lets educate IGN on this because they clearly weren't aware of it....i see paleontologist making this mistake all the time and it's a simple thing to point out.
apparently the spinosaurus was a hybrid in jp3. so if we go by the hybrid logic, it could have the dna of other creatures that could have fought trex's like this, but its a bit of a stretch
Well that's the explanation the new Jurassic World gave about that Spinosaurs, that it was an experiment of Amalgamation testing. However at time Jurassic Park 3 was under development, they portrayed the Spinosaurs as a regular Spinosaurs, differing as much from the real animal as were the other dinosaurs.
@BurningSaints Our oxygen would be fine for the vast majority of dinosaurs, if not all. Not only does oxygen content not effect active respirators in the same way it does passively respiring organisms, which are often conflated, dinosaurs also had far more efficient respiratory systems than mammals.
Yeah, people definitely went way too far with the feathered rex depictions back when Yutyrannus huali was described. It'd be much more plausible and likely if T. rex either had really small feathers that were sparsely dotted around the body, or it had no feathers at all.
There's no direct fossil evidence of Tyrannosaurus rex having feathers. The main reason why it's plausible T. rex had feathers is because Yutyrannus huali was a Tyrannosaurid with direct evidence of feathers, since Yutyrannus is related to Tyrannosaurus, it wouldn't be that far of a stretch to say T. rex also had feathers. However, there's no fossils of T. rex feathers, and it wouldn't be likely T. rex had a feathery coat covering its body.
It's so annoying when people keep repeating "They are genetically modified clones, they are not the originals". Yes, we get it, we know it, we all saw the same movie, but that excuse could only be valid for the 1990 outdated dinosaurs, not the horrible godzilla movie monsters they've been doing in recent times that are so harmful to the public view on dinosaurs (and no, i'm not talking about the hybrids)
Massive thank you to Joe for lending his dinosaur expertise to this video! What other dinosaur related movies or games would you like for him to react to? And for even more videos like this one, make sure to check out our Expert Reacts playlist!
ua-cam.com/play/PLraFbwCoisJDJlDKavZ05eNKT9jb7wOrO.html
He did Jurassic park trilogy it's only fair to do Jurassic World trilogy now
React to Jurassic world Dominion trailer and Jurassic World Triology
He isn’t a Dinosaur expert because he doesn’t even know or say why the Velociraptors look drastically different from the velociraptors from Mongolia
Joe who
Wrong bro they find
2 Meter raptor but OK
And?
They modified
U read the books 👍😂
No dinosaur is the real one
The spinosauros
Form the 3 move
He is total modfi 😂👍
But in the movies they don't tell it so much
But the books my homi red the books
And accept testify from the maker hahaha
THANK YOU FOR ACKNOWLEDGING that first initial bite from the T-Rex in Jurassic Park 3 would've severely injured and possibly even killed the Spinosaurus. FINALLY JUSTICE for Rexy!
to be fair that wasnt rexy and was probably another rex ingen made on the other island. And it looked like a juvenile
@@suda_lifts Movie Extra literally said it was a Sub-Adult
Rexy also would probably bleed to death in reality from all the strikes from Indominus in JW...But only Rexy deserves justice right?
To be fair that spino shouldn't have won that to begin with. Just Jack horners anti t-rex propaganda lmao
@@zayah4838 it's a movie, a rex cant even chase a jeep . whole movie will be ended in 45 min since rex's outbreak .
FINALLY!!! A paleontologist who mentions the Utahraptor! You sir are my hero!!!
Hopefully we'll get to see Human Expert Dinosaurs reacting to Dinosaur Experts, right?
Lol.. Like who? Barney?
You got me picturing like, a parrot in a tiny labcoat or something XD
Now, eventually you do plan to have dinosaurs on your dinosaur tour, right? Hello?.. Hello?
@@clankers8929hello!
Keep in mind, even in the movies and books, they acknowledge that due to Cloning process and subsequent genetic engineering the dinosaurs seen in the story are not exactly “authentic.”
And Wu literally said in the novel that they are making monsters, not dinosaurs, due to the added aesthetics.
true, even in JW is told himself said, "These Animals would Look Really different if they're Pure, but you don't want authenticity, You Want MORE TEETH"
Actually, in the original JP book, Wu goes to Hammond and says that they actually do have “real” dinos, but Wu doesn’t think that it’s what the public will want to see. And he recommends to Hammond that they should basically “dumb” them down and make them more like what the general public expects to see. And Hammond emphatically tells Wu no. He wants them authentic.
@Arushi Mittal exactly! And Wu actually gets kind of excited in the books that the dinos are able to reproduce in the wild because it means he really got it right if all of the "hardware," shall we say, is able to work on its own in the wild.
also the raptor fossil is also inaccurate sooooooo. That has no in universe explanation, it has the out of universe explanation of some palaeontologists applying deinonychus to the velociraptor, but that was pretty much a fringe theory. But Crichton thought it sounded more dramatic, which it did to be fair.
I’m glad this paleontologist realized Spielberg just and crichton reversed the names with deinonychus. The last paleontologist react with “Insider” never brought that up and just assumed it was just an exaggeration of the actual velociraptor. This happens way to often and it’s a little irritating. Everyone always thinks the velociraptors are based off the real thing and in truth they were actually modeled after the closely related dromaeosaurid Deinonychus. The movies, and book, Steven Spielberg and Michael Crichton felt to swap the names between the two species because, everyone felt “velociraptor” sounded a lot more dramatic.
it wasn't reversed per se. He used deinonychus, Grant digging in north america gives that away, it's just Spielberg used the same sources Michael Crichton did in Gregory S Paul who was testing out new genus nomenclature. What Paul did is just rename Deinonychus antirrhopus to Velociraptor antirrhopus since Velo was the "patriarch" raptor species between the two in the fossil record--aka the first known. Paul even provided artwork that was used in the film in Grant's trailer. Paul abandoned the practice a few years later and people forgot this is what the filmmakers and crichton did back in the day.
Btw, no, in the novel they were also called velociraptor because crichton used paul as well in addition to that purported "better sounding name" story.
@@scottb3034 yes.
also, at the time of Crichton writing the novel, some popular dinosaur books featured 'Deinonychus' as a sub-species of 'Velociraptor' (classified as 'Velociraptor antirrhopus')
Funny enough that Utahraptor was named as the movie was filming. Of course Utahraptor would still be even bigger than the raptors in the film with a total length of 20-25’+ and weighing as much as a adult polar bear! Since then other giant dromeosaurids have been described such as Dakotaraptor, Achillobator, Austroraptor and few other unnamed species known from scant remains. I’m sure there where still even bigger dromeosaurs that awaits discovering and description.
@@joshuapalmer265 utahraptors as pack hunters, with the behavior/intelligence and aggression likeJP raptors, would be absolutely devastating.
A man that gorgeous could explain dinosaurs to me for hours and hours and I'd never get bored.
So nice to see such a passionate expert who can balance corrections and education with an appreciation/ understanding of the source material.
Thank you, that's very kind
@@PalaeoJoe87 Thank you as well!
Typically apex predators have extraordinary eyesight. The fact that the T-Rex had minuscule upper limbs only means it relies more heavily on its other features. Which are the powerful jaws and it’s eyes. So the idea that t-Rex 🦖 couldn’t see stationary objects as prey is absurd.
Seven hunnid on UA-cam is the best UA-camr rn
When ya have a bite force around the 6 tons, yeah arms ain´t really necessary
The don't move thing actually came from the books because of the new DNA. The books have some really wild ideas compared to the movies.
@@MrTroodon_Official what's crazy is that they current estimate is that those tiny arms could still manipulate objects up to 400lbs.
So while little and probably not used often, they could still be dangerous.
@@dalem8878 Oh indeed, they still could tear a person face with them
8:18 has got to be my favorite of the raptor vocalizations in the films, that braying trumpet of a roar followed by that chittering still sends a chill down my spine to this day, in the best possible way haha such cool sound design.
8:04 - In fact, the reason Jurassic Park's doors have HANDLES instead of KNOBS is because during the making of the film, they did enough research to know that Deinonychus couldn't have turned a knob, so they had the doors use handles that it could push down without turning its wrists. The more you know!
My only problem with people critiquing JP is they don't take into consideration that they're genetically modified. None of them are 100% so they have gain some extra traits from the animals used to fill in the gaps in their DNA.
Came here to say the same thing
And some dinosaurs were made genetically to made to look cooler. The dilophosaurus frill was most likely frilled lizard dna in it, and the venom most likely being a mixture of spitting cobra dna and other animals.
Doesn't stop the franchise from pretending that they are 100%. Afterall, all the "Dinosaur Rights" characters are saying "de-extinct", as if the animals are exactly the same as they were millions of years ago.
The criticisms are valid.
@@TVJUNK85 actually..... no!
These films never pretend to be real. Wu just spits out the facts in 2015.
@@muhammedzayan4399
They really don't. Claire even has a big speech in Fallen Kingdom about the "first time you see a dinosaur", as if seeing the skeletons in a museum isn't seeing an actual one, but seeing the cloned variation is. Further, the Dinosaur Protection Group again repeatedly says "de-extinct" and refers to the animals going "extinct all over again".
That sort of language would not apply to genetic experiments that do not entirely match their genetic ancestors.
So again, the criticism is valid.
In the novel, the excuse behind the Trexs vision being based on movement was actually the result of the tree frog DNA as frogs can only see in the movement. Grant theorized this after the following morning, the kids saw a parasaurolophus eating from the thicket they were hiding in but it didn't see them despite being right in front of it. Also, there was a juvenile Trex with Rexy, but she on the other hand could see just fine.
Tree frogs can see movement. They wouldn’t be able to function if they couldn’t. They are SPECIALIZED at picking up on movement and reacting to it quickly, but they can see things that don’t move.
Well I'm just happy that the iconic noise of the velociraptor is passable. Thanks.
8:30
Most of the sounds used for Velociraptor were actual sounds of birds, particularly geese and penguins
7:27
Note:
The only known possibly venomous dinosaur was Sinornithosaurus, based on pockets inside the upper jaw that might have contained glands that connected to the grooved upper teeth.
this is proven false as of now, Planet Dinosaur has a lot of outdated theories and ideas on dinosaurs
Possible toxic saliva like the bacteria in Kimono Dragons , or forced vomit like the bird, European Roller.
@@dustanglx50 komodo dragons. kimono is a japanese clothes
I'd like to see what paleontological insight Joe gives regarding the fictional Skull island dinosaurs from Peter Jackson's "King Kong" now.
Probably will criticize that movie as well even though that's totally fictional
@@animezilla4486 Maybe not. But if he were to criticize, he'd approach it from a scientific standpoint, not with the intent to be harsh.
Can you imagine a 20 foot dilophosaurus running towards you with that vicious screaming shriek 😱
Edit: Also, can we get this guy in the next jurassic park movie to play Grant's long lost son?
1:53 Whoa so that little kid at the excavation scene in the first movie was kind of right lol 🦃
The noises the raptors are making are mating turtles lol
The reason why the T. rex and Jurassic park can't see movement is because it has froggy in it because they found the mosquito and the & amber samples but they didn't have the complete Ginam and they need something else so that used frog diner don't feeling ditty and sequence caps
Frogs can see movement
It's a movie genius
In the book the dilophosaur is bigger. It picks him up by the head and carries him off. The reason its smaller in the film is so it doesnt take the limelight from the raptors and t rex
To be fair, in Cricton's original Lost World novel, that whole "eyesight based on movement" comes back to litetally bite the poor sap who tried to utilise this idea!
And most plot points in 3 were recycled from unused plot points from Cricton's two novels anyway! The river boat, the raptors at the beach at the end, raptors & eggs, a second apex predator and even stealthy carnotaurus!
More videos about dinosaurs with Joe pls. Ty ;)
Actually given that the door handle is in that shape all they would have had to do push down on it.
JP3 came out in 2001. Only took him 21 years to react
So this paleontologist but me to believe that the spinosaurus being bigger than T-Rex only ate fish and can't take out another dinosaur
@@animezilla4486 He's saying it would be unlikely to take out a t-rex if they ever met.
Keep in mind he was probably like 10 or 15 years old when this film came out and also youtube came out in 2005.
1:30 This is one of the biggest mistakes people have on these movies, the Velociraptor found in this place called Montana used to be called Velociraptor antirrhopus, now rightfully known as Deinonychus antirropus, the reason why the famous dog sized Velociraptor is confused with the Jurassic Park Velociraptor is because they are two different species, this is because the dog sized Velociraptor was found in Mongolia, NOT Montana, that beingsaid, the Jurassic Park Velociraptor is a Deinonychus antirrhopus and the real Velociraptor is called Velociraptor mongoliensis.
They intentionally made the Dilophosaurus smaller to help the audience differentiate from the raptors.
Sounds disingenuous since dilos were mid-sized animals much bigger than raptors, so they were already different enough. They probably just thought making it small and unassuming would enhance the shock effect of the sudden reveal of the frill and venomous spit
Wait didn't they say now that the T. Rex may have not been covered in feathers or if it had such it was sparsely covered?
Atm the best approach to feathers on Trex would be something similar to elephant hair, small not very visible filaments all through the body. It was a really big animal so large amounts of big feathers are very very unlikely
We have a skin imprint of the Rex now. If it had any feathers the were small a few.
@@dalem8878 The skin impressions we have are the size of quarters and sparse lmfao
@@richardhesutton putting "lmfao" at the end of your statement like it's some obviously well known fact just makes it seem like you just googled it real quick to try and sound smarter than other people
@@richardhesutton they aren't small or sparse. it is all over the body and some are close to a foot in size. the skin samples also have been known to be pebbly/scaly for nigh on 20 years (a sample was attempted to be sold back in 2003).
you just sound daft with your response.
Ross must be happy for this guy as
paleontologist
Naw, Ross would have fit and pouted that *he wasn't picked to present the video, lol
“Angry geese.” Legitimately terrifying.
I'm surprised this guy supported the idea that raptors hunted in packs, and kept referring to it being very credible and believable. Since not a single raptor fossil has actually been found with others, unlike many other fossils.
This would suggest that they did not hunt in packs, but were more like lone hunters, hunting independently.
the dilophosaurus frills only make sense if its small like in the movie. If its 20 meters long it definitely wont have that as a defense mechanism lol
Or if they did have frills, would most likely be used to attract mates or compete for mates.
Actually the author himself is responsible for that misconception about Velociraptors.
At the time it was hotly debated whether or not deinonychus was in the same genus as velociraptor.
@@RubyCarrots3232 *Thank you* Someone that mentions that part.
How come most people don't acknowledge that the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park aren't 100% real dinosaur? Yeah, they have dino DNA in them, but other DNA in there too. Dr. Wu even says in Jurassic World that if they were 100% real dinosaur some of them would look quite different.
Very interesting, thanks so much 😀
The best bit of writing in Jurassic Park was the "Frog DNA Splicing" because they knew that what we know about dinosaurs was always changing. This can account for most present and future inaccuracies. In JP3 Dr. Grant even called them "Monsters" and said they where not dinosaurs.
the t rex fence wires snap from the ground up when if it walked into them itd be from the top to bottom.
Fun fact, many animals can open doors like that and it doesn't require wrist rotation. That is just the way humans do it. That's like saying "X animal can't open this because it has no fingers." As the octopus opens the jar right behind them lol
dont care what he is saying but , just on the spirit of dominion trailer release : just speechless for the trailer , been waiting for it and man just wanted to see it now , just no words !!
If you don't care what he's saying why watch the video
The confusion between the Velociraptor and Deinonychus comes probably from a book. If you read the (still) excellent "predatory dinosaur of the world" of Gregory Paul, you see some curious classification (Daspletosaurus-Tyrannosaurus, Yangchuanosaurus-Metriacanthosaurus and more interestingly for us Deinonychus become Velociraptor anthirropus. We now know that it seems that Deinonychus seems to be more likely Dromaeosaurinae not velociraptorinae. The Paul's classification is than doubtfull. All the best.
The Velociraptor skeleton image that the Editor shows is The same size as the Raptors in Jurassic Park!
Not trying to be mean, but the reason the velociraptor was to big is because that’s how big it was in the novel. And same for the rex, it was also like that in the novel.
Also at the time the novel was written deinonychus was referred to as velociraptor antirhopus (not sure that’s entirely the right word) as opposed to modern velociraptor being velociraptor mongoleinsis (not sure that’s spelled right) Also the velociraptors held their hands that way because of the limitations of a person controlling the puppets for the claws
@@benlussetto7443 ahh… ok thank you
@@benlussetto7443 you are 99.9% right. antirrhopus with 2 Rs...but besides that absolutely correct. Also mongoliensis.
first person i've come across that got these particular facts right.
"Open the door. Get on the floor..."
"That's not how a dinosaur walks. The footwork is all wrong."
Dinosaur experts react to monster hunter monsters part 2 when?
Lion crocodile and an elephant were used for the t rex sounds
One thing really that they messed up, but didnt know at the time, is spinosaurus was actually quadrapedal, not bipedal. A few years after this movie came out, they discovered a more complete speicmen with more intact leg bones and thusly we found they would have been far more squat. We know that as the egyptian estuaries dried up, they began to move inland and compete with extremely large theropods for more terrestrial prey, from tooth marks in local herbivores matching spinosaur teeth. So they might have had an idea how to tangle with a T rex, but the T rex was far more suited for fending off a spinosaurus than a spinosaurus would be able to handle a T rex.
That's debated whether spinosaurus was bipedal or not
Spinosaurus was bipedal
@@franciscozapata7625 thats what we used to think. But then we found more complete spinosaurus fossils and it was a more squat, quadrapedal predator. Which makes the fact that it started venturing out onto land to hunt large prey when the estuaries and swamps of egypt began drying out all the more crazy.
@@FearlessCrusader100 the quadrupedal spinosaurus is no longer valid since the discovery of the tail, are you still in 2017?
@@franciscozapata7625 what? The tail is flat and paddle shaped, tha has nothing to do with the leg structure. You telling me crocodiles have to be bipedal because their tails are flat?
5:19 lol
Nothing in Jurassic World is natural! We have always filled gaps in the genomes with the DNA of other animals and if there 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
Dinosaurs lived sixty five million years ago. What is left of them is fossilised in the rocks, and it is in the rock that real scientists make real discoveries! What John Hammond and InGen did at Jurassic Park is create genetically engineered theme park monsters! Nothing more and nothing less.
-Dr. Alan Grant
A quote with such a deep meaning yet is completely ignored in the upcoming sequel.
Congratulations, you repeated a quote that isn't relevant in the slightest to the video.
The raptors sound that they make are cute
Now make him react to Ice Age 3-5-6
Actually the JP"Velociraptor" is rather a Deinonychus
Utahraptor wasn't discovered until the film was in POST production, so it was discovered AFTER they made the large ones for the film
Do ppl in this comment section know what a “palaeontologist” is or are they all little fetuses who play Fortnite?
How accurate was the information used at the time the film was made. Original Jurassic park was made in 1993 If you say the movie is wrong because of something learned in 2014 that's not really fair.
for the most part especially on the T. rex it was mostly accurate, but they did take some hard creative liberties especially with the raptors
Changes from one dinosaur to another, as mentioned above the Tyrannosaurus was pretty up to date, even the "velociraptors" were fairly accurate.
It's not supposed to be fair, it's supposed to be educational.
T-Rex was fine. Velociraptor was the wrong species of theropod. Dilophosaur is not even close.
So when the next superhero movie come out, are you going to get a superhero expert to react to it or no
Are you implying dinosaurs aren't real?
Hello Dr. Gellar!
we have an idea of what the parasaurolophus, velociraptor, and T. rex sounded like
It’s actually an embarrassment how the movies after the lost world just turned the Dino’s into cliche movie monsters vs them just being animals doing their thing.
New evidence shows that trex might not have been covered in feathers. More like quills or fuzz but not explicitly feathers. Maybe a combination of the two or three
just scales at this point.
Important question: If dinosaurs were brought back to life like in Jurassic Park, would they still get as tall as they were back then?
There's a significant number of anti-intellectuals posting here. It explains so much about the world today
So where do Adam and Eve fit in here?
15:03 Spinosaurus was not bigger than a Trex, it was longer. Spinosaurus was a slender animal and Trex was much more robust, and since size is determined by mass not weight then Trex was indeed bigger, that’s why a hippo is bigger than an anaconda even though the anaconda is longer.
The hippo vs anaconda is a little bit of a disingenuous comparison.
"Bigger" in not exactly the most scientifically accurate descriptor of size. It would be more like comparing a Rhino vs a Giraffe. Rhino is heavier, but Giraffe is taller. And comparing the size depends on if you are considering "big" to be height or weight.
Spinosaurus spine bones were much smaller in diameter than those of T. Rex indicating it probably was much lighter
Actually spinosaurus is estimated to weigh about 8-10 tons, so they were about the same size weight-wise
@@sergeantwasp6018 8 to 10 seems quite large genuinely curious wanna look into it do you know where that estimate is from
Why does he say T. rex was mostly covered in feathers when we have actual skin imprints that clearly show it was largely covered with scales? It had cousins that lived in colder climates that were feathered like Yutyrannus, but T. rex isn't generally thought to be feathered today.
What's the game they keep showing?
Jurrasic world evolution 2
I’m waiting for the “real serial killer reacts to serial killing in movies”
And also it's a movie they didn't wanna have a T. rex as it sounded like Crocodile
yet the rex had croc sounds.
Ross geller is that you
5:35 actually used an elephant sound for that
the rex overall had gator/croc, lion/tiger, baby elephant and a few other miscellaneous sounds.
8:09 - so what you’re telling me is that they had Barbie doll wrists. 🧐
in my knowledge t rex skin not covered in feather most likely to resemble elephant with few more feather in some area and if you want imagine what dinosaur sound just hear cassowaries most likely what we got close to reality
Incorrect. Tyrannosaurus skin impressions depict large, spherical scales. Not very elephantine.
where are the animated scenes from??
The jurassic park movies are just monster movies with a dinosaur skin. They don't treat them like actual animals
Have you not watched the movies? In the T-Rex breakout scene, the T-Rex is exploring its environment like any other animal would. In the second movie, we see dinosaurs protecting their young, examples being the stegosaurs and the T-Rex pair. This argument can be made in the cause of JPIII, but for all of the other movies, there is usually a completely valid explanation for an animals behavior. These movies have done a lot to portray these marvelous animals as something other than monsters.
@@MellowGrunt10 you are correct about 1 and 2 but every movie past those to turn them into movie monsters.
Congratulations on making the 1000th video on 'Dinosaur expert reacts to Jurassic Park ' video lol!!!!
'angry geese'
??? Is there any other type of geese?
The Utah raptor was discovered a year after the jurassic park film came out
fun fact, the veliciraptors in jurassic park were based on the deinonychus., not the veliciraptor. please consider this before making any judgement. lets educate IGN on this because they clearly weren't aware of it....i see paleontologist making this mistake all the time and it's a simple thing to point out.
apparently the spinosaurus was a hybrid in jp3. so if we go by the hybrid logic, it could have the dna of other creatures that could have fought trex's like this, but its a bit of a stretch
Well that's the explanation the new Jurassic World gave about that Spinosaurs, that it was an experiment of Amalgamation testing. However at time Jurassic Park 3 was under development, they portrayed the Spinosaurs as a regular Spinosaurs, differing as much from the real animal as were the other dinosaurs.
@@constantinetranos2225 ah ok
wow, so it might have been better to switch the raptor with the dilophosaurus..
in the novel the compy's were poisonous lol.
Can you have him React Jurassic World Dominion trailer
What about the air content, would dinosaurs be able to breathe fine in our world? Or vice versa?
It's very likely they could
@BurningSaints Our oxygen would be fine for the vast majority of dinosaurs, if not all. Not only does oxygen content not effect active respirators in the same way it does passively respiring organisms, which are often conflated, dinosaurs also had far more efficient respiratory systems than mammals.
6:15 The concept of t.rex being covered in feathers has been a thing of the past in the scientific community for quite some time now. :/
Yeah, people definitely went way too far with the feathered rex depictions back when Yutyrannus huali was described. It'd be much more plausible and likely if T. rex either had really small feathers that were sparsely dotted around the body, or it had no feathers at all.
Geese are always angry
Fun fact: in the original novel for Jurassic Park(1992) it was stated that the Velociraptor was actually Deinonychus.
6:13 it's actually been very recently confirmed that T-Rex did in fact not have feathers.
It's somewhat up in the air, it could, but if it did it would be a very sparse covering, like hair on elephants
Daredevil.
The book explains a lot of the things mentioned.
11:40 that's supposed to be geosternbergia
That's not Gav Murphy
Choose your side Jurassic park or Jurassic world
JP. JW is utter garbage.
Jurassic Park is way better then the new crap, it treats their dinosaurs as animals and not movie monsters
@@zayah4838 so you dont like Jurassic World too right?
Easy Jurassic park
@@jessefisher3038 easy Jurassic World
Only thing that he said that is wrong is that he said a tyrannosaurus could hear you. They were unable to hear human screams or voices. Apparently.
He was wrong about t-rex having feathers
@6:14 Isn't this still under debate? Skin impressions have been found that suggest they were at least partially unfeathered.
There's no direct fossil evidence of Tyrannosaurus rex having feathers. The main reason why it's plausible T. rex had feathers is because Yutyrannus huali was a Tyrannosaurid with direct evidence of feathers, since Yutyrannus is related to Tyrannosaurus, it wouldn't be that far of a stretch to say T. rex also had feathers. However, there's no fossils of T. rex feathers, and it wouldn't be likely T. rex had a feathery coat covering its body.
It's so annoying when people keep repeating "They are genetically modified clones, they are not the originals". Yes, we get it, we know it, we all saw the same movie, but that excuse could only be valid for the 1990 outdated dinosaurs, not the horrible godzilla movie monsters they've been doing in recent times that are so harmful to the public view on dinosaurs (and no, i'm not talking about the hybrids)
Exactly, thank you!
Agreed
If Nothing else Jurassic Park gained an interest in paleontology .. beyond its entertainment quality…
Joe what is your stance on the fact, if they found dino dna, and they would try to re-create them, what is your view on this?
Can't find Dino DNA, DNA has a certain life span pretty sure it's like 6 million years or something
Hasn’t the T-Rex feather thing now been debunked? Certainly not ‘covered’ in feathers at least 💁🏻♂️
I’ve heard that Tyrannosaurus was actually not feathered at all but instead had quite rocky bark like skin and maybe some fibre type coating.
Where’s Ross?