Talk:Jurassic Park

	This Films related article has been assessed as SIGNIFICANTLY PROBLEMATIC in one or more ways. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.
This article requires attention for the following reason(s): It contains unsourced statements Tagged since December 2021

Knowledge

"Based on how little knowledge we have of dinosaur DNA and genetic codes, it would require supercomputers and software far beyond our current capabilities to render and read the DNA code of an long-extinct animal. "

Actually, given sufficient genetic material we can take a fair stab at de novo assembly for damn near anything these days. Guess we should update it?Queex (talk) 16:58, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Hammond had what, three Cray XMPs in the book? I think that's less computing power than an Xbox 360. King Skeleton (talk) 13:41, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

I'll update it, then. Queex (talk) 10:59, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

"The Unix system"

It was a Silicon Graphics IRIX workstation running FSN (File System Navigator, FSN, pronounced "fusion") - a 3D file manager which gained quite a bit of fame after it's appearance in Jurassic park!

A lot of people thought the visualisation was an example of media misrepresentation of computers/a hollywood mockup - but it's absolutely a real thing!

There is even a free clone, the File System Visualiser, available for Unix-like operating systems today :) At the time, it was IRIX-only, meaning that if you saw the FSN at the time, it must have been running on a UNIX system (a Unix System V derivative with BSD extensions to be precise)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fsn_(file_manager) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRIX https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_Graphics#Entertainment_industry ^{— Unsigned, by: Cprobertson1 / talk / contribs}

Dinosaur inaccuracy

You can get round the problem of dinosaur inaccuracy easily: the company engineered the dinosaurs to look like the popular idea of dinosaurs. We're so used to scaly dinosaurs that feathered ones would have looked stupid, and they needed to attract customers. It's not good science, but it's good business. Avida Dollars^{her again} 13:03, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

mind blown

did some digging, turns out jurassic park is movie and not a factual documentary account of dinosaurs and/or cloning. i know, like finding out santa isnt real right?

im not sure any one has come away from watching jurassic park thinking anything in it was real, thinking the science was intended as an accurate representation of advanced and complicated science and tech, no one has failed their science exams for any age or ability level because they were taking notes on dino behaviours and hunting strategies.

the bit in the film were the t rex shows you and its all 'he cant see you if you dont move?' - no one took that as anything more than a plot device in movie they knew was sci fi because they'd paid money to go see in cinema. people only remember this bit of 'dinotrivia' because it was in that film and only associate with that film and if fro some reason they cant remember its from jurassic park, the danger to person or or to 'truth' is they'll look fools at party if tried pretending to paleotologist or whatever and thats the only apparent the fact they know about dinosaurs. its coming up anywhere else.

the names of dinosaurs arent being correct means little either. except for t rex, which everyone already knew, didnt come away from the film knowing incorrect names of dinosaurs because i didnt come away knowing any of the dinosaur names for most part. i came away thinking 'im glad that dinosaur with frills ate the guy from sienfield, hes a prick' and 'my farts smell like popcorn now'. that this dinosaur didnt have frills and didnt spit venom, but now pop culture depictions of this dino all do now, is not the terrible result of spreading lies masked as fact. id be hard pressed to find any depictions at all out side of the franchise and/or direct references to it. no one cares about what they got wrong in the film about dinosaurs and cloning because people understand what films are. they understand even in the unlikely science in a science fiction film is real, they are not watching a science lesson. the cloning in the film is exposition to explain plotholes and provide better explanation having dinosaurs in a park which, surprise, everyone knows are extinct, than saying they found them down the back of sofa. and dubious message about ethics of science. no one expected or believed they were watching a step by step how to guide.

tl/dr you shouldnt be allowed to watch films if you are fuming about t rex missing feathers and everyday life for you must be a constant challenge. AMassiveGay (talk) 23:18, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Ummmm... okay? Friedman (talk) 00:51, 28 December 2021 (UTC)