Just finished The Lost World

[Brontozaurus]

I last read this book around 2 years ago. It was very well-written. It's a shame that they couldn't have included the Carnotaurus in the movies (if I remember correctly, it's even in the TLW arcade game)

Yeah, it was in that game. The game designers took the idea of a chameleon dinosaur a bit literally; in addition to changing colour, it has the weird swivelling eyes that chameleons have!

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

I last read this book around 2 years ago. It was very well-written. It's a shame that they couldn't have included the Carnotaurus in the movies (if I remember correctly, it's even in the TLW arcade game)

Yeah, it was in that game. The game designers took the idea of a chameleon dinosaur a bit literally; in addition to changing colour, it has the weird swivelling eyes that chameleons have!

That is  a bit..weird. lol

I was reading your signature there..you know  I would almost bet that next most realistic Dinos come from Disney..whether that is advanced AI animatronic ones or something more biological.

[Gwangi]

There were cases were you could possibly see what was used..the Dilophosaurus had coloration similar to a poison dart frog and also had a venom like a spitting cobra.  The T-Rex and Velociraptors had forked tongues.

Maybe in the book they had forked tongues but certainly not in the movie. I know they wanted the Velociraptors to flick their tongues in and out but Horner wouldn't have it. Still, that's a snake characteristic, not frogs.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

There were cases were you could possibly see what was used..the Dilophosaurus had coloration similar to a poison dart frog and also had a venom like a spitting cobra.  The T-Rex and Velociraptors had forked tongues.

Maybe in the book they had forked tongues but certainly not in the movie. I know they wanted the Velociraptors to flick their tongues in and out but Horner wouldn't have it. Still, that's a snake characteristic, not frogs.

the Dilophosaurus had coloration similar to a poison dart frog ..

^  This however is..and of course the west african frog sex conversion element is still there. 

[stoneage]

There were cases were you could possibly see what was used..the Dilophosaurus had coloration similar to a poison dart frog and also had a venom like a spitting cobra.  The T-Rex and Velociraptors had forked tongues.

Maybe in the book they had forked tongues but certainly not in the movie. I know they wanted the Velociraptors to flick their tongues in and out but Horner wouldn't have it. Still, that's a snake characteristic, not frogs.

Still frogs have forked tongues that flick in and out to capture insects.   

[Gwangi]

There were cases were you could possibly see what was used..the Dilophosaurus had coloration similar to a poison dart frog and also had a venom like a spitting cobra.  The T-Rex and Velociraptors had forked tongues.

Maybe in the book they had forked tongues but certainly not in the movie. I know they wanted the Velociraptors to flick their tongues in and out but Horner wouldn't have it. Still, that's a snake characteristic, not frogs.

Still frogs have forked tongues that flick in and out to capture insects.   

There is a slight split at the tip of the tongue but not really what I would consider a "forked" tongue.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

The Dilophosaurus maquette I have has a forked tongue whereas the Raptor and Rex don't..I can't recall if the film version did.

[Gwangi]

The Dilophosaurus maquette I have has a forked tongue whereas the Raptor and Rex don't..I can't recall if the film version did.

In "The Lost World" we get a good look at the Tyrannosaur's tongue, no forking. Really you're just grasping at straws here. The entire reason they included the frog DNA element was to give them a reason to change sex. These other things you list like forked tongues and bright display colors don't have to be derived from the amphibian DNA and are too ambiguous to know anyway. What were we even talking about now? I can't remember.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

The Dilophosaurus maquette I have has a forked tongue whereas the Raptor and Rex don't..I can't recall if the film version did.

In "The Lost World" we get a good look at the Tyrannosaur's tongue, no forking. Really you're just grasping at straws here. The entire reason they included the frog DNA element was to give them a reason to change sex. These other things you list like forked tongues and bright display colors don't have to be derived from the amphibian DNA and are too ambiguous to know anyway. What were we even talking about now? I can't remember.

I meant  I can't recall if the film Dilo had a forked tongue. I know the Rex and Raptors don't in the film.

I don't know it makes sense to me.  That was the primary reason but it would be unlike Crichton to not show more examples.

[Krissy]

I enjoyed the Lost World book, but not nearly as much as Jurassic Park. Looking at it aside from the scientific aspects, it's a lot more dark and morbid than even the first book, and Malcolm's sermons aren't nearly as good as they were in JP.

There's a tendency to read too much into Crichton, to expect him to explain everything about his animals. I recall seeing people hypothesising the Dilophosaurus' spitting ability was derived from cobra DNA, where in actuality Crichton's just challenging our perception about these animals. He's not trying to rationalise everything, he's suggesting we know so very little about these animals and many of our assumptions are probably deeply wrong, and they may have been capable of things we don't expect or understand (same is true with modern animals). Another good example is his Triceratops in The Lost World: rather than bellowing like behemoths as we assume, they yelp like small dogs.

As for why the animals have forked tongues - I honestly think it's just one of Crichton's baffling goofs. He does that from time to time, for instance suggesting that Tyrannosaurus had a weak bite in Jurassic Park.

[SBell]

There were cases were you could possibly see what was used..the Dilophosaurus had coloration similar to a poison dart frog and also had a venom like a spitting cobra.  The T-Rex and Velociraptors had forked tongues.

Maybe in the book they had forked tongues but certainly not in the movie. I know they wanted the Velociraptors to flick their tongues in and out but Horner wouldn't have it. Still, that's a snake characteristic, not frogs.

Still frogs have forked tongues that flick in and out to capture insects.   

I think they mean flicking them like a lizard or snake to smell their surroundings, which is almost certainly not something dinosaurs would have done (or flicked their tongues for prey capture, either, for that matter).

Unless there was a whole lot more frog DNA influence then we thought, in which cse these really would be dino-monsters, and not dinosaurs.

AND, in terms of the book--I remember reading it (in Italy, no less!) and thinking it pretty weak--and still being even more disappointed by the movie that was only barely based on it.