[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Dinosaur fiction is more real than fact

On Tue, 10 Oct 1995, Terry Colvin wrote:

> There is a geological principle , which can be applied in many 
> circumstances" Absence of evidence , is not evidence of absence ", 
> just because something hasn`t been found , doesn`t mean that it never 
> existed in the first place. 
> Jurassic Park , the film was also a rare example of a film being more 
> correct than the book , e.g. , Stegosaurii in the book , have cheek 
> pouches (like a squirrel), when all of the specimens that have been 
> found TO DATE do not , again , this does not mean that they didn`t 
> haver them , but on the balance of evidence , the film wins , with no 
> cheek pouches in sight .
Ah, yes, but you are forgetting the important fact : there were _no_ 
Stegosaurs in the film ( apart from the infamous Stegasaurus clip).