Professionals Annoyed By Entertainment

[Tvtyrant]

Not just smoke, soot. The walls around those torches should be black, as should the ceilings.

Maybe that's why in those movies, unlike in real life, the castle walls are almost always bare stone, instead of being whitewashed or painted. Easier to clean.

Even candles have this problem. The renovation of the Sistine Chapel led to outrage because candle soot over 500 years led to a layer of grime darkening the paintings; turns out they were closer to pastel in color.

The lack of rugs, tapestries and floor hay. Heating stone is extremely expensive in fuel, covering it in insulation was important.

[Radar]

Even candles have this problem. The renovation of the Sistine Chapel led to outrage because candle soot over 500 years led to a layer of grime darkening the paintings; turns out they were closer to pastel in color.

The lack of rugs, tapestries and floor hay. Heating stone is extremely expensive in fuel, covering it in insulation was important.

This kind of reminds me of the shock, when people learned that ancient greek monuments and buildings were painted with quite festive colors.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

Even candles have this problem. The renovation of the Sistine Chapel led to outrage because candle soot over 500 years led to a layer of grime darkening the paintings; turns out they were closer to pastel in color.

Similarly, Rembrandt's famous "Night Watch" painting (1642) doesn't depict a night scene at all. It is a bit shadowy, the guy was known for his spectacular lighting, but varnish and soot had colored it so much darker so quickly that this became the name it was known by.

[Tvtyrant]

This kind of reminds me of the shock, when people learned that ancient greek monuments and buildings were painted with quite festive colors.

"These aren't classy at all! They are downright lewd!"

Similarly, Rembrandt's famous "Night Watch" painting (1642) doesn't depict a night scene at all. It is a bit shadowy, the guy was known for his spectacular lighting, but varnish and soot had colored it so much darker so quickly that this became the name it was known by.

I had not heard that one! The restored colors are very shiny, totally changes the scene.

[Radar]

"These aren't classy at all! They are downright lewd!"

Or just downright kitsch.

I had not heard that one! The restored colors are very shiny, totally changes the scene.

I began to wonder if a whole art period got misunderstood because of this.

[Kaptin Keen]

Except I can't think of a single movie where there was a scientist as the main protagonist, that they even had a half decent attempt at getting the science right.

I'm sure that can't be right. Well, perhaps not a physicist - but I'm sure you can come up with an archaologist or historian who was the main protagonist. Indy Jones, Robert Langdon, Jack Ryan. I admit I'm harder pressed to find a movie featuring ... wait, Dr. Emmet Brown. He's not the main protagonist, I admit.

MacGyver? What is MacGyvers background?

Ian Malcomb (the chaos theoreticist) is a mathematician. That, at least, is a pretty hard science.

Anyways .. nevermind =)

Edit: Speaking of Jeff Goldblum - Seth Brundle is as hard a scientist as you get. And he's very much the main protagonist. Even if he's an insect for much of the movie.

[Eldan]

Scientist as protagonist, yes. Trying to portray actual science too, no. None of these look anything much like science.

I remember seeing some low budget horror movie once that played in a physics lab for much of it and really, really loving it despite how cheesy it was. I couldn't really tell why, until about one hour in, it finally dawned on me: "Holy ****, this movie actually has scientists in it. I feel so understood". That feeling had never happened to me before.

[Radar]

To be honest, there is a lot of truth in this as exagerated as it is. Also Ghostbusters touched on an importent subject of work in academia fairly close to the point.

[Peelee]

MacGyver? What is MacGyvers background?

B.S. In Chemistry and Physics. Also a Vietnam vet (noncombatant, obviously).

Ian Malcomb (the chaos theoreticist) is a mathematician. That, at least, is a pretty hard science.

Malcolm. And Dr. Malcolm, much as I love him, basically just said "Chaos theory means this park will never work. The logical conclusion is that chaos theory means no technological progress will ever work, society as a whole shouldn't work, and it should be completely impossible to get a Ph.D. in math."

[Kaptin Keen]

Scientist as protagonist, yes. Trying to portray actual science too, no. None of these look anything much like science.

I remember seeing some low budget horror movie once that played in a physics lab for much of it and really, really loving it despite how cheesy it was. I couldn't really tell why, until about one hour in, it finally dawned on me: "Holy ****, this movie actually has scientists in it. I feel so understood". That feeling had never happened to me before.

Well, I didn't say the science checked out. Just that a scientisst was the protagonist.

Um .... uh.

Interstellar. Scientist protagonist, and some of the science kinda checks out. Better?

B.S. In Chemistry and Physics. Also a Vietnam vet (noncombatant, obviously).

See, I couldn't find that info. So kudos on being well-informed on your nerd trivia =D

Malcolm. And Dr. Malcolm, much as I love him, basically just said "Chaos theory means this park will never work. The logical conclusion is that chaos theory means no technological progress will ever work, society as a whole shouldn't work, and it should be completely impossible to get a Ph.D. in math."

I spelled it wrong? Hm, but I looked it up. I wonder if the source was wrong, or if I just fail at reading.

[factotum]

Malcolm. And Dr. Malcolm, much as I love him, basically just said "Chaos theory means this park will never work.

Which, ironically, is a total misunderstanding of what chaos theory is...which makes him a bit of a sucky mathematician, really.

[Eldan]

Well, I didn't say the science checked out. Just that a scientisst was the protagonist.

Um .... uh.

Interstellar. Scientist protagonist, and some of the science kinda checks out. Better?

Hm. I can't really fault the protagonist for most of the movie, though I did kind of want to strangle them in the last quarter hour when they started talking about love transcending space-time inside a black hole.

The Martian felt pretty solid to me. Though Wattney doesn't seem to act like most astronauts I've seen, who always seem very quietly and seriously competent in interviews and so on, he does act a lot like some lab geeks I've known.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

The Martian felt pretty solid to me. Though Wattney doesn't seem to act like most astronauts I've seen, who always seem very quietly and seriously competent in interviews and so on, he does act a lot like some lab geeks I've known.

Astronauts are weird. Even for a film like Apollo 13 their behavior had to be dialed up, adding just a little bit of drama, because they are trained to be calm all the time.

It makes sense. In most professions with immediate life or death odds (military, pilot, surgeon, cops, fire fighters, bomb squad etc) there are at least some moments where it pays to just jump into action and do something. Even a non-surgeon doctor sometimes has to put a bunch of pressure on a wound and mildly yell at someone to call over the crash team. But for an astronaut the solution is always to stay calm and think. Always. So when they say "Houston, we have a problem", or when they're disagreeing about which courses of action will safe or kill everyone, they sound like they're ordering a sandwhich. And not at one of those places with a line behind an annoying customer.

On the one hand it would be really cool to have a movie where they actually act like that, on the other hand it would be just a little unsettling.

[Eldan]

Ad Astra is going a bit in that direction, though that movie has other problems (for the record, I still liked it.)

[Traab]

B.S. In Chemistry and Physics. Also a Vietnam vet (noncombatant, obviously).


Malcolm. And Dr. Malcolm, much as I love him, basically just said "Chaos theory means this park will never work. The logical conclusion is that chaos theory means no technological progress will ever work, society as a whole shouldn't work, and it should be completely impossible to get a Ph.D. in math."

He was talking more about the biological aspect and that there was no way hammond could possibly be prepared for everything that would happen because "Life uhhh finds a way" He wasnt predicting a nihilistic view of the world, he was being a realistic pessimist. His little rant was basically, "You figured out how to do this amazing thing and rather than study it, take careful steps with it, you jumped right into the dino park deep end and tossed a mission complete label on it with no idea what any of the long term issues might be you utterly irresponsible HACK!"

Also, I still find the entire premise to be mind shatteringly stupid. These scientists figured out a way to master cloning to the point where they can bring back dinosaurs, and they used it to open a park? Why werent they using their unrivaled mastery of dna to cure everything, to regrow damaged organs, to produce super crops to help end world hunger, super animals for the same, etc? Who needs investors to build your vanity project dino park when your company owns every dime on earth through its 50 nobel prize winning breakthroughs that reshaped humanity forever?

[Peelee]

See, I couldn't find that info. So kudos on being well-informed on your nerd trivia =D

I really, really love MacGyver. My first instinct was to type that immediately, but I double checked to be sure. Good to know the ol' memory hasn't failed me yet!

And don't get me started on the new series.

I spelled it wrong? Hm, but I looked it up. I wonder if the source was wrong, or if I just fail at reading.

I also really, really love Jurassic Park.

He was talking more about the biological aspect and that there was no way hammond could possibly be prepared for everything that would happen because "Life uhhh finds a way" He wasnt predicting a nihilistic view of the world, he was being a realistic pessimist. His little rant was basically, "You figured out how to do this amazing thing and rather than study it, take careful steps with it, you jumped right into the dino park deep end and tossed a mission complete label on it with no idea what any of the long term issues might be you utterly irresponsible HACK!"

Also, I still find the entire premise to be mind shatteringly stupid. These scientists figured out a way to master cloning to the point where they can bring back dinosaurs, and they used it to open a park? Why werent they using their unrivaled mastery of dna to cure everything, to regrow damaged organs, to produce super crops to help end world hunger, super animals for the same, etc? Who needs investors to build your vanity project dino park when your company owns every dime on earth through its 50 nobel prize winning breakthroughs that reshaped humanity forever?

Are you familiar with my "Hammond was a huckster" synopsis? And if not, are you interested? It more or less explains all that pretty well (even if the book dies a better job of laying out the evidence, there's still enough in the movie to make the case).

[Eldan]

Huckster how? Even assuming a lot was wrong with the park, he still had actual dinosaurs.

[Jay R]

Huckster how? Even assuming a lot was wrong with the park, he still had actual dinosaurs.

He had been a huckster all his life, starting with a flea circus. He didn't develop dinosaurs and then decide to use them for a theme park. He wanted to build an unrivaled theme park so he came up with a way to clone dinosaurs.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

He was talking more about the biological aspect and that there was no way hammond could possibly be prepared for everything that would happen because "Life uhhh finds a way" He wasnt predicting a nihilistic view of the world, he was being a realistic pessimist. His little rant was basically, "You figured out how to do this amazing thing and rather than study it, take careful steps with it, you jumped right into the dino park deep end and tossed a mission complete label on it with no idea what any of the long term issues might be you utterly irresponsible HACK!"

Minotaur droppings. (In the film at least, for the book see the next paragraph over.)

A Tyrannosaurus isn't that different from a bull elephant, and those are kept in zoos. Hammond could have known how to keep them from escaping for the price of a single ticket. And even if nobody there has ever been in a zoo, they should have been able to guess it right. A moat would have worked just fine. A thick steel fence too. Instead they went with electric fences. And that would have been fine, even on their remote island vulnerable to power outages if they had had a proper backup generator, like hospitals have because they never want the heart-lung machines to fail. But not only wasn't there a proper backup generator, the whole electrical system was tied into a computer system. No computers, no power. And the computer system couldn't be rebooted without access to two locations, the route between which would be infested with dinosaurs if rebooting was ever needed. And then all of that was designed by a single employee, seemingly the lowest paid one of the bunch, and nobody so much as questioned his design choices. Nedry didn't even need to be a sabotaging bastard, this setup would have failed sooner or later. A moat meanwhile would have worked just fine.

Now, as far as I understand the book had the whole thing set up more like a wildlife reserve, the dinosaurs freely roamed large chunks of the island and there were a lot more of them, even before they started breeding. That would have been harder to completely secure. But we have wildlife reserves in the real world full of elephants and lions, and those things have lodges where people don't get eaten. A moat or strong fence around the main lodge, a helicopter pad on the roof and a single satellite phone, radio installation or any kind of "hi government, our dinosaurs are loose, you may now panic"-button and the story would have ended ones everyone was safely back at the lodge. You know what, make that building house all of the important equipment too, and the backup generator, just to be sure.

Great movie, but, you know, not super realistic in how this dinosaur theme park scenario might actually play out.

[Vinyadan]

Astronauts are weird. Even for a film like Apollo 13 their behavior had to be dialed up, adding just a little bit of drama, because they are trained to be calm all the time.

It makes sense. In most professions with immediate life or death odds (military, pilot, surgeon, cops, fire fighters, bomb squad etc) there are at least some moments where it pays to just jump into action and do something. Even a non-surgeon doctor sometimes has to put a bunch of pressure on a wound and mildly yell at someone to call over the crash team. But for an astronaut the solution is always to stay calm and think. Always. So when they say "Houston, we have a problem", or when they're disagreeing about which courses of action will safe or kill everyone, they sound like they're ordering a sandwhich. And not at one of those places with a line behind an annoying customer.

On the one hand it would be really cool to have a movie where they actually act like that, on the other hand it would be just a little unsettling.

I think that 2001 was like that. There is a slow tension build-up, but all you see is sweat.

[Peelee]

Huckster how? Even assuming a lot was wrong with the park, he still had actual dinosaurs.

Did he, though? Hammond tells of a flea circus in both versions - a small mechanized circus, seesaws going up and down, trapezes swinging, and the children being excited, saying "mummy mummy I can see them, I can see the fleas!" There were, of course, no fleas. Hammond simply presented the children what they wanted to see and told them it was the case, and profited from it.

Now, that's a pretty innocent tale on its own, but it speaks to Hammonds modus operandi. In the novel, he funds the park by showing investors the marvels of genetic manipulation - an elephant the size of a housecat. He never once tells anyone it is a naturally occurring pygmy elephant that was born with dwarfism, of course. He doesn't really say anything about it. He talks about genetic manipulation, the power of science, and then unveils the elephant. The audience sees a genetically engineered tiny elephant. Are you sure the dinos aren't a metaphorical elephant with dwarfism?

For all Hammond's talk of sparing no expense, he cut corners everywhere he possibly could. He hid the full scope of the project from Nedry and strong-armed him into work that wasn't in the contract. He hired Wu straight out of school. He put the island off the cost of Costa Rica so he could do what he wanted without needing to worry about pesky laws or regulations. The surface was shiny but the guts were ugly as hell.

He also had no idea what he was doing. When he opens the champaign, he grabs the wrong kind of glasses. Labels with dinosaur names are misspelled. He continues to breed raptors despite the first batch having one that killed all but two of the others, and all indications of them being murder machines jn general as well as freakishly intelligent. Hammond claimed he insisted on being present for all births, but he didn't even know about the one going on at the moment, he's not on the island at all times, they have an entire second island where a lot of the nitty gritty goes on and you're just seeing a showroom designed to look pretty, and at this point you have to wonder if Hammond ever tells the damn truth.

His entire history is one of shamelessly lying and hoodwinking people. He is the man behind the curtain. Those animals may have some dinosaur parts in them, but they're all Indominus Rexes. They're all a conglomeration slapped together to resemble what we think dinosaurs were like, then passed off as the genuine article, but they're just better dwarf pygmy elephants. It's pleather sold as leather. It's a con by an incredibly talented con artist.

[Aedilred]

Also, I still find the entire premise to be mind shatteringly stupid. These scientists figured out a way to master cloning to the point where they can bring back dinosaurs, and they used it to open a park? Why werent they using their unrivaled mastery of dna to cure everything, to regrow damaged organs, to produce super crops to help end world hunger, super animals for the same, etc? Who needs investors to build your vanity project dino park when your company owns every dime on earth through its 50 nobel prize winning breakthroughs that reshaped humanity forever?

Because Hammond shares a mindset with Robert Angier from The Prestige. Neither is really that interested in money (though they have a lot of it) or even in value to society. They come into possession of amazing, world-changing things, and use them exclusively for utterly trivial purposes. But it's worth it for "the looks on their faces".

[Traab]

Minotaur droppings. (In the film at least, for the book see the next paragraph over.)

A Tyrannosaurus isn't that different from a bull elephant, and those are kept in zoos. Hammond could have known how to keep them from escaping for the price of a single ticket. And even if nobody there has ever been in a zoo, they should have been able to guess it right. A moat would have worked just fine. A thick steel fence too. Instead they went with electric fences. And that would have been fine, even on their remote island vulnerable to power outages if they had had a proper backup generator, like hospitals have because they never want the heart-lung machines to fail. But not only wasn't there a proper backup generator, the whole electrical system was tied into a computer system. No computers, no power. And the computer system couldn't be rebooted without access to two locations, the route between which would be infested with dinosaurs if rebooting was ever needed. And then all of that was designed by a single employee, seemingly the lowest paid one of the bunch, and nobody so much as questioned his design choices. Nedry didn't even need to be a sabotaging bastard, this setup would have failed sooner or later. A moat meanwhile would have worked just fine.

Now, as far as I understand the book had the whole thing set up more like a wildlife reserve, the dinosaurs freely roamed large chunks of the island and there were a lot more of them, even before they started breeding. That would have been harder to completely secure. But we have wildlife reserves in the real world full of elephants and lions, and those things have lodges where people don't get eaten. A moat or strong fence around the main lodge, a helicopter pad on the roof and a single satellite phone, radio installation or any kind of "hi government, our dinosaurs are loose, you may now panic"-button and the story would have ended ones everyone was safely back at the lodge. You know what, make that building house all of the important equipment too, and the backup generator, just to be sure.

Great movie, but, you know, not super realistic in how this dinosaur theme park scenario might actually play out.

None of that had anything to do with malcoms stance though as he was saying this BEFORE the hurricane hit. When he had no idea how good or bad security was, redundancy was, so on and so forth, he objected to the entire idea of just rearing back and spurting dinosaurs made through frankensteining frog and dino dna together onto an island and thinking they had it all under control. Even on actual wildlife preserves accidents happen and people die. But hammond seemed blithely certain that despite clearly sparing plenty of expense on several important areas, he had it all under control because his park was run by scientists and low bidding IT experts. The only animal expert he had was treated like a grumpy jerk who just wanted to ruin their fun. Pfft, "Kill the raptors, they are insanely dangerous" indeed!

[Jay R]

<excellent compilation of observations and details.>

Very nice summary. Very nice indeed.

[Peelee]

Minotaur droppings. (In the film at least, for the book see the next paragraph over.)

A Tyrannosaurus isn't that different from a bull elephant, and those are kept in zoos. Hammond could have known how to keep them from escaping for the price of a single ticket. And even if nobody there has ever been in a zoo, they should have been able to guess it right. A moat would have worked just fine. A thick steel fence too. Instead they went with electric fences. And that would have been fine, even on their remote island vulnerable to power outages if they had had a proper backup generator, like hospitals have because they never want the heart-lung machines to fail. But not only wasn't there a proper backup generator, the whole electrical system was tied into a computer system. No computers, no power. And the computer system couldn't be rebooted without access to two locations, the route between which would be infested with dinosaurs if rebooting was ever needed. And then all of that was designed by a single employee, seemingly the lowest paid one of the bunch, and nobody so much as questioned his design choices. Nedry didn't even need to be a sabotaging bastard, this setup would have failed sooner or later. A moat meanwhile would have worked just fine.

Now, as far as I understand the book had the whole thing set up more like a wildlife reserve, the dinosaurs freely roamed large chunks of the island and there were a lot more of them, even before they started breeding. That would have been harder to completely secure. But we have wildlife reserves in the real world full of elephants and lions, and those things have lodges where people don't get eaten. A moat or strong fence around the main lodge, a helicopter pad on the roof and a single satellite phone, radio installation or any kind of "hi government, our dinosaurs are loose, you may now panic"-button and the story would have ended ones everyone was safely back at the lodge. You know what, make that building house all of the important equipment too, and the backup generator, just to be sure.

Great movie, but, you know, not super realistic in how this dinosaur theme park scenario might actually play out.

They did have moats, especially around the T-Rex paddocks. It's problematic in the movie because it disappears when they need it to. Also, the island was geothermally powered. There was no power outage; at least, not one caused by the main generator. Rebooting the computer system switched over to auxiliary power, which was a glitch nobody knew about because they had never done that. The computer system could be rebooted from the control room as planned; only the main generator needed to be accessed from a separate location and, again, that was a glitch. Also, Nedry didn't sabotage much, and the island had failed before the movie started - Nedry only turned off the systems necessary to access the embryos and escape to the docks. Most of the fences still had power, they only failed when the system was rebooted because auxiliary power couldn't handle the drain (and they only rebooted the system because Nedry had locked it). However dinos were breeding and escaping from their enclosures long before, as we can see from the hatched egg Grant finds on the second day - the book specifies which animal it was while the movie doesnt, but it's the same coloration, size, and texture as the raptor egg we saw earlier, and they are very much not in the raptor enclosure. Nedry simply accelerated their discovery that they were not in control of the island. Also, all design choices were by Hammond and Arnold to facilitate automation to the point of running the island off a handful of people if necessary.

Also, dinos didn't roam more freely in the book before the storm; if anything, they roam more freely in the movie, such as when we see the big watering hole. The book does go into significantly more detail about the security setup, such as a real-time Dino count by species on command, tracking of any animals movements over a 6 hour period (IIRC on that part) for every 6 hours over a lengthy amount of time, at least (Also IIRC, they don't explicitly say, they just say "and the previous 6 hours. And previous. And previous..." while hitting the button to make the trail graphic display that immediately). Also, 92% of the island was covered in cameras with night-vision and (again IIRC here) infrared capabilities, and all windows in all buildings having solid 3-inch thick steel bars on them, among other things.

I highly recommend the book, it's probably my favorite book, and it is the epitome of "the book was better." And let me tell you, I love the movie, so that's really saying something.

Very nice summary. Very nice indeed.

... I really like Jurassic Park.

[BeerMug Paladin]

I highly recommend the book, it's probably my favorite book, and it is the epitome of "the book was better." And let me tell you, I love the movie, so that's really saying something.



... I really like Jurassic Park.

I agree with these statements quite a bit. It's probably the single book I've read the most times.

[snowblizz]

Also, I still find the entire premise to be mind shatteringly stupid. These scientists figured out a way to master cloning to the point where they can bring back dinosaurs, and they used it to open a park? Why werent they using their unrivaled mastery of dna to cure everything, to regrow damaged organs, to produce super crops to help end world hunger, super animals for the same, etc? Who needs investors to build your vanity project dino park when your company owns every dime on earth through its 50 nobel prize winning breakthroughs that reshaped humanity forever?

Being able to SCIENCE! one thing doesn't immediately mean being able to SCIENCE! another thing. That is kinda the gist of the entire thread.
2nd movie shows Hammond is kinda deep sunken cost fallacy into the whole dinopark idea.

Not to mention maybe they do use their knowledge for other stuff, and that's partly how Hammond funds his vanity project. InGen survives 4 movies worth of catastrophes and financial hits after all.

We also find out in JW:FK that there are ethical lines Hammond doesn't want to cross. Messing with humans being one.

[Kaptin Keen]

Did this whole Dino Park discussion follow from my misspelling of Dr. Malcolm's name? Or was it a thing even before I posted? =)

I think when you discover a new technology, you immediately, instinctively, turn to the most profitable use for it. Quite possibly, you have a plan to then, later, use it for all the good things it can do. But then you get busy getting rich, and never get around to the good stuff.

I once read .. The Sphere, I think it was, and I found it so appallingly bad that I decided - not only can the man not write, there's propably no way to turn his books into movies. So I haven't seen any of the filmifications of his stuff, except Jurassic Park, and I watched that for the dinosaurs. Still, the plot is literally riddled with holes, starting with the fact that the people on the island knew they were surrounded by dinosaurs. No one would have been ok with such flaky security, knowing the craziest predators the planet had ever produced was right on the other side of an undersized electric fence.

Literally no one would go 'Eh .. it's propably fine.'

[Traab]

Did this whole Dino Park discussion follow from my misspelling of Dr. Malcolm's name? Or was it a thing even before I posted? =)

I think when you discover a new technology, you immediately, instinctively, turn to the most profitable use for it. Quite possibly, you have a plan to then, later, use it for all the good things it can do. But then you get busy getting rich, and never get around to the good stuff.

I once read .. The Sphere, I think it was, and I found it so appallingly bad that I decided - not only can the man not write, there's propably no way to turn his books into movies. So I haven't seen any of the filmifications of his stuff, except Jurassic Park, and I watched that for the dinosaurs. Still, the plot is literally riddled with holes, starting with the fact that the people on the island knew they were surrounded by dinosaurs. No one would have been ok with such flaky security, knowing the craziest predators the planet had ever produced was right on the other side of an undersized electric fence.

Literally no one would go 'Eh .. it's propably fine.'

And you think a DINO PARK would have been the best way to get rich off of mastering cloning and genetic manipulation to the point of resurrecting plants and animals extinct for millions of years? They could have put monsanto out of business inside a year making lord knows what sort of super crops (Its rice infused with multivitamins! The daily supply of every vitamin and mineral your body needs with every bowl! We can also make it grow in literally every environment except the vacuum of space! Still working on that one.) They could have virtually eliminated the need for an organ bank by being able to regrow a replacement liver/lung/kidney for anyone who will last longer than a week without surgery based off of their own genetic material! Seriously, a dino park is just about the worst, least profitable option conceivable to use this science. Its literally nothing but a vanity project. And if your super rice project goes off the rails, its probably not going to break loose and eat everyone. Probably.

[Kaptin Keen]

And you think a DINO PARK would have been the best way to get rich off of mastering cloning and genetic manipulation to the point of resurrecting plants and animals extinct for millions of years? They could have put monsanto out of business inside a year making lord knows what sort of super crops (Its rice infused with multivitamins! The daily supply of every vitamin and mineral your body needs with every bowl! We can also make it grow in literally every environment except the vacuum of space! Still working on that one.) They could have virtually eliminated the need for an organ bank by being able to regrow a replacement liver/lung/kidney for anyone who will last longer than a week without surgery based off of their own genetic material! Seriously, a dino park is just about the worst, least profitable option conceivable to use this science. Its literally nothing but a vanity project. And if your super rice project goes off the rails, its probably not going to break loose and eat everyone. Probably.

What? No! First of all, it's quite irrelevant what I think would be the fastest way to make the money - it's only relevant what Hammond might have thought would earn him money.

No, what I think is the best way to make money off cloning tech is to weaponize it. And I guess Hammond would agree. This is totally irrelevant, but if I had to guess, Dino Park is a showroom. And the audience is the military. Although to be honest, tourism is a big market - right up there with energy, medicine and military.