Comments on: Jurassic Park: Mysterious Island Inhabited by the Last Living Dinosaur

By: Glynis Smy

Glynis Smy — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 14:30:51 +0000

Well I enjoyed it!

By: BoJack454

BoJack454 — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:41:57 +0000

Lauren,keep up the good work.It almost sounds like some folks just want to argue.
Something funny about the movie.I’m not a paleantologist or archeoligist,but according to things I’ve read,the T-Rex did not even live in the jurassic period.

By: Chef Lauren

Chef Lauren — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:03:31 +0000

Thanks for commenting everyone. As everyone knows, I am a resturant owner and Executive Chef by trade. I write because it's a way for me to unwind and to share interesting stories.

I don't do this for a living but, I have so much respect for the people that do. Articles that I write don't always have to work.

Remember, we are writing to a larger public here that may not even give two blinks about grammer or spelling.

That's not always the case but, we do what we do because we enjoy it. That's why I do it.

By: Jonesey

Jonesey — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 22:59:43 +0000

“Your just there for bate.” Unfortunately, this sums up the article for me. Close, but the facts let it down.
It should read, “You’re just there for bait.” These type of little errors and the hyperbole in the text mean this article doesn’t work as well as it should — the material’s there, it’s just the execution that lets you down.

By: Lauren Axelrod

Lauren Axelrod — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 04:33:54 +0000

It’s much more enjoyable when the conversation is intelligent and the readers actually learn something.

Thanks Karen

By: Karen N

Karen N — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 04:20:40 +0000

Really nice article and enjoyable debate:)

By: Lauren Axelrod

Lauren Axelrod — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:30:55 +0000

Kyle,
I know your trying to express your point and I appreciate your research behind it. I, however, am specializing in Forensic Archeology with a second degree in Radiology.My interests really lie in Egypt so it's nice to have a fresh opinion.

Thanks again for your comments. As long as there's no cursing or you convey your opinion in an intelligent manor, I respect it.

By: Kyle P

Kyle P — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:59:05 +0000

The evidence has (within the past decade) become more or less \”irrefutable\” after the groundbreaking discovery of what I believe was a type of Cretaceous-Jurassic-raptor (if my memory serves me right, a Archaeopteryx…lithographico, I believe?). It was so neatly preserved that upon close investigation, feathers could be found surrounding it. More so, the skeletal structure was distinctly taking on the appearance of modern birds, especially in the limbs and feet.

Most scientists, and when I say most I mean almost every prominent archaeologist, agrees that the direct ancestor of birds are dinosaurs. It should be printed in most texts by now (Every recent text I have received on Dinosaurs has confirmed their link to birds, with extensive length as well), and I do know that the scientific link has been verified as much as possible, and that it is now commonly taught throughout college courses.

But, I mean, there are people who still argue that the Earth is 6,008 years old and claim that to this day the argument is lively and refuted…so…well, you get the idea.

Humorously enough you can actually create an accurate T-Rex skeleton out of a Chicken.

Also, I believe you’re thinking of Whales, Sonic. Whales arose from a mammalian group which has a common ancestry with the hippo. Sharks have been around far, far longer than dinosaurs, as they are some of the oldest macro creatures to exist. I don’t believe any sharks were evolving into mammalian groups, as sharks had already lost bone structure, and as we know through evolution, once lost, you cannot gain it again. Sharks are more or less at the peak of their evolution, and don’t have much else they can do with themselves, similar to snakes. However, at one point Sharks did grow in size, and this is due, as you correctly assume, to the mass extinction. With adaptive radiation comes a general increase in size among most things.

As a sidenote, I must say that I\’m not debating in spite or malice. I actually find it rewarding to uphold these small conversations. It gives me practice for my major over the summer.
But, you do write thought out and interesting articles. After all, I wouldn\’t be here if it was boring, now would I?

By: Lauren Axelrod

Lauren Axelrod — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:23:00 +0000

Komodo dragons have a relationship with dinosaurs! Although they did not descend from the dinosaurs, the two share a common ancestor and link. As I stated in the article. A link.

By: Sonic

Sonic — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:20:56 +0000

It is believed that the immense size of predatory sharks such as the great white may have arisen from the extinction of the dinosaurs and the diversification of mammals. It is known that at the same time these sharks were evolving some early mammalian groups evolved into aquatic forms. Not just birds my friend.