Differenze tra le versioni di "Gregory Scott Paul"

nessun oggetto della modifica
:''The dinosaur world I grew up in was classical. They were universally seen as scaley herps that inhabited the immobile continents. There was no hint that birds were their direct descendents. Being reptiles, dinosaurs were cold-blooded and rather sluggish except perhaps for the smaller more bird-like examples. They all dragged their tails. Forelimbs were often sprawling. Leg muscles were slender in the reptilian manner. Intellectual capacity was minimal, as were social activity and parenting... Hadrosaurs and especially sauropods were dinosaurian hippos, the latter perhaps too titanic to even emerge on land, and if they did so were limited by their bulk to lifting one foot of the ground at a time. Suitable only for the lush, warm and sunny tropical climate that enveloped the world from pole to pole before the Cenozoic, a cooling climate and new mountain chains did the obsolete archosaurs in, leaving only the crocodilians. Dinosaurs and the bat-winged pterosaurs were merely an evolutionary interlude, a period of geo-biological stasis before things got really interesting with the rise of the energetic and quick witted birds and especially mammals, leading with inexorable progress to the apex of natural selection: Man. It was pretty much all wrong. Deep down I sensed something was not quite right. Illustrating dinosaurs I found them to be much more reminiscent of birds and mammals than of the reptiles they were supposed to be. I was primed for a new view.''
*Sono ambiguo riguardo le opere di [[Michael Crichton|Crichton]], siccome includono elementi dubbiosi anti-scientifici. Però non mi posso lamentare d'un tizio che mi include nei ringraziamenti del suo best seller... Il film non era male, ma non li perdonerò per aver presentato ''Brachiosaurus'' come un goffo dagli arti pesanti. Io non avevo niente a che fare con quello. Credevo che fosse un peccato che i brachiosauri, che erano potenzialmente onnivori e certamente non placidi come mucche, avrebbero mancato l'opportunità di papparsi di quei mocciosi nellsull' albero.
::''I am ambiguous about Crichton’sCrichton's body of work, as it includes dubious anti-scientific elements. But I can’t be too upset about a fellow who includes me in the acknowledgements of his bestselling novel... The movie was okay, but I will never forgive them for presenting'' Brachiosaurus ''as such a heavy limbed clunker. I had nothing to do with that. I thought it was too bad the potentially omnivorous brachiosaurs – which were unlikely to have been as placid as cattle – missed the opportunity to snarf up the bratty kids when they were up in the tree. ''