[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Glut's Encyclopedia
In a message dated 95-11-07 21:16:11 EST, firstname.lastname@example.org.EDU.AU writes:
> Regarding Glut's work, I definitely do _not_ suggest that anyone
>buys his "Dinosaur Dictionary". My relatives bought this for me, thinking
>it would be a good addition to my little library. It was supposedly
>written in 1972, but there is such a lack of information, the reader
>feels like saying "To hell with this", and picking up a Golden Book on
>dinosaurs. There is no mention of Deinonychus (which was a sixties
>discovery), all the photos and diagrams are of the old plodders ( T rex
>even has three fingers ), and the entry on Velociraptor reads :
> A coelurosaur, with some megalosaurian features.
>Compared to a lot of other texts available at the time, this was a poor
>effort. I like his Transformers script "The Primitives" even better.
> Marcus Good
The Encyclopedia will be better. For one thing, I and many professional
paleontologists helped him with it. And he assembled a humongous number of
specimen photos, which would make the book valuable just for that reason
alone. He's come a long way since his _Dinosaur Dictionary_ days. Of course,
we'll still have to wait and see what the publisher did with his text...