HD-man's Serious Dino Books/Dino-Related Reviews!

[HD-man]

My 112th review for this thread is a positive 1. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Like"/"Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Like"/"Helpful" votes it can get b/c it's for a very good book that deserves more attention. Many thanks in advance.

Mostly good, part 7 ( www.goodreads.com/review/show/6991349141 ): 4/5

I recommend reading Lomax's Locked in Time: Animal Behavior Unearthed in 50 Extraordinary Fossils (henceforth Time) in conjunction with Witton's Life through the Ages II (henceforth LA, which I reviewed: www.goodreads.com/review/show/6242530008 ): For 1, like LA, Time includes section-by-section references to more technical sources (which is especially important "when it comes to behaviour": https://archosaurmusings.wordpress.com/2017/03/27/buried-treasure-dave-hone/ ); For another, in terms of coverage, LA & Time complete each other very nicely (E.g. LA has more Triassic sections, while Time has more dino sections); For yet another, as much as I like Time as is, it could be better in 2 major ways, hence this review, plus the LA recommendation.*

1) As much as I like the writing as is (especially its accessibility), there are several weird bits of it throughout Time. More specifically, there are several overly-broad descriptions (E.g. "They originated[...]around 54 million years ago, near the middle to late Eocene"; "Before the appearance of pterosaurs during the Middle Triassic, roughly 220 million years ago") & inconsistent figures (I.e. Some of them are arranged up-down, while others are arranged left-right).

2) As much as I like the paleoart as is, especially of peaceful dinos (Dilophosaurus: https://archive.ph/X47eM ) (Oryctodromeus: https://archive.ph/1sio1 ), Nicholls's art style works MUCH better in color. More specifically, there's a lot of detail that's hard to see (& thus, appreciate) in black-&-white.** What's especially frustrating is that the Korean translation IS in color ( https://archive.ph/IUg8p ).

*As indicated by some of the best dino/paleo books in recent years (E.g. Naish/Barrett's Dinosaurs: How They Lived and Evolved, which I reviewed: www.goodreads.com/review/show/3505614509 ), Nicholls & Witton go very well together.

**Just to clarify, the same does NOT go for all art styles: GSPaul's art style works MUCH better in black-&-white; This is especially apparent in his Princeton Field Guides.

[HD-man]

@DefinitelyNOTDilo

I recently started reading a book called Otherlands, by Thomas Halliday, and I knew I had to recommend it to you. It's absolutely a must read in my opinion.

I might read it at some point, but I'm a bit iffy about the reverse chronological format & lack of illustrations. In any case, many thanks for the thoughtful recommendation

[DefinitelyNOTDilo]

@DefinitelyNOTDilo

I recently started reading a book called Otherlands, by Thomas Halliday, and I knew I had to recommend it to you. It's absolutely a must read in my opinion.

I might read it at some point, but I'm a bit iffy about the reverse chronological format & lack of illustrations. In any case, many thanks for the thoughtful recommendation

I was unsure about that too, but it actually works quite well. And the man is a master of description imo, to the point that illustrations don't feel as important as they otherwise would.

[HD-man]

My 113th review for this thread is a positive 1. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Like"/"Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Like"/"Helpful" votes it can get b/c it's for a great book/show that deserves more attention. Many thanks in advance.

The Kratts at their best ( www.goodreads.com/review/show/7195771649 ): 5/5

Short version: If I was going to build the perfect science/nature edutainment show, I'd build a Kratt show. If I was going to build the perfect Kratt show, I'd build a Wild Kratts (henceforth WK) because it's just the right blend of education & entertainment.

Long version: Read on.

1stly, just to clarify, I originally wrote this review for WK's Predator Power DVD ( www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/Review-update-7-Repost-1098355109 ). However, the Kratts are still going strong 10+ years later & I wanna celebrate that by applying this review to Wild Predators, which is basically said DVD in book form for younger kids (E.g. The goshawk on the cover looks like the goshawk in "Raptor Roundup", my favorite episode).

2ndly, as you may have noticed, I usually review non-fiction books. That's because non-fiction books are more structured than other forms of edutainment (& thus, easier for me to review). However, I feel so strongly about WK that I had to make an exception. In this review, I list the 4 main reasons why I think WK is currently 1 of the best (& few good) science/nature shows while using "Raptor Roundup" as an example.*

1) In WK, all the characters are a ton of fun: For 1, the WK crew reminds me of Mystery Incorporated, but better defined/developed; Chris & Martin (henceforth the Kratts) are, like Fred, the leaders, but also "real-life zoologists" ( www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/the-kratt-brothers-get-animated-when-wild-kratts-shows-kids-that-animals-can-take-you-anywhere-in-science-on-pbs-kids-go---january-2011-112241999.html ); Aviva is, like Daphne, the hot girl, but also a brilliant inventor; Koki is, like Velma, the researcher, but also a sassy black woman; Jimmy is, like Shaggy, the lovable coward, but also a "master gamer"; All that's missing is the animal mascot (unless you count the Tortuga HQ); For another, the WK villains remind me of Disney villains, but with unique twists; Chef Gourmand is like Chef Louis from The Little Mermaid, but with a Southern accent instead of a French 1; Also, Gourmand specializes in cooking with endangered animals; Donita Donata is like Cruella De Vil from 101 Dalmatians, but with 1 bumbling henchman (Dabio) instead of 2; Also, Donita freezes animals in suspended animation to use for jewelry/clothes; & don't tell me Zach Varmitech's incredibly shrill voice doesn't remind you of Iago from Aladdin😉

2) Growing up, my favorite stories were animated animal adventures (E.g. "Walt Disney Animated Classics") & real-life animal adventures (E.g. "True-Life Adventures"). WK combines the best of both worlds with animated versions of real-life animal adventures. Better still, said adventures are based around key scientific concepts (E.g. In "Raptor Roundup", the Kratts challenge themselves to ID as many raptors as they can; We learn about classification).

3) There are 3 main reasons for WK's good humor: 1) Funny characters who can be summed up by Dr. Cox's rant in the "My Fishbowl" episode of Scrubs; Aviva, like Carla, is "very funny...WHEN [she's] being sarcastic or [she's] up on [her] high horse"; Zach, like Elliot, "is funniest when [he's] an anal retentive train wreck" (Donita too); Koki, like Turk, "sells it with a cocky attitude"; Gourmand, like Janitor, "is amusing because quite frankly he's insane"; The Zachbots "can turn a phrase"; Dabio has a funny name (I.e. It sounds like Fabio); Jimmy, like Ted, "is the hospital sad sack"; The Kratts, like Dr. Cox, are "funny because [they] commit"; 2) Clever dialogue; Martin's animal names (E.g. "Stomp" the secretary bird) & Gourmand's dish names (E.g. "Raptor amandine. Vulture bouillabaisse. Eagle Gorgonzola. Ooh, owl étouffée. And falcon fritters") are especially good examples of WK's witty wordplay; 3) Classic physical comedy; The battles between the Kratts & Gourmand, like those between Sebastian & Louis, recall "the dark slapstick of classic era Warner Bros. cartoons" ( www.dvdjournal.com/quickreviews/l/littlemermaid.q.shtml ).

4) To quote Sampson ( https://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2005AM/webprogram/Paper89443.html ), "The web of life is composed of two distinctly different kinds of threads—those that link organisms at any given moment in time through the flow of matter and energy (ecology), and those that link all lifeforms through deep time via genetic information and shared common ancestry (evolution). Seen from this dual and complementary perspective, the two themes are inseparable. Without evolution, our vision is severely limited to the present day and we cannot begin to fathom the blossoming of life's diversity from single-celled forebears. Without ecology, the intricate interconnections we share with the current panoply of lifeforms cannot truly be envisioned. United in a single theme, evolution and ecology provide a powerful lens through which to view life's web, forming the foundation of an integrated and underutilized perspective on nature. In short, we need dramatic increases in levels of both ecological literacy, or "ecoliteracy," and evolutionary literacy, or "evoliteracy," with this dynamic pair of concepts reinforcing each other." That's exactly what WK does. "Raptor Roundup" is an especially good example of evoliteracy (E.g. "Got to love raptors[...]Fantastic flyers with powerful talon feet. Direct descendants of dinosaurs[...]Who still fly the skies today. Raptors are one of the most awesome creature families on the planet. They're not meant to be fried or fricasseed. They belong living free and in the wild") & ecoliteracy (E.g. "And the great thing about raptors is no matter where you live. Or what the weather's like. Raptors are flying all around. So get to know the raptors that live around you. Keep on creature venturing. And keep on identifying[...]Raptors![...]See you on the creature trail") reinforcing each other.

*In reference to "few good": As far as I know, the BBC & PBS are the only channels that still make consistently good science/nature shows (which is even more true now: https://web.archive.org/web/20241202120709/https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-features/pbs-bbc-studios-partnership-walking-with-dinosaurs-marriage-1236046681/ ). I used to love watching the Discovery Channel & Animal Planet, but now they're full of garbage like Yukon Men & Mermaids, respectively (which is even more true now: https://web.archive.org/web/20240629165551/https://vertpaleo.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/SVP_Discovery_Dino_Hunter_2020-revised.pdf ).

[HD-man]

My 114th review for this thread is a negative 1. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Like"/"Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Like"/"Helpful" votes it can get because it's outnumbered by opposing reviews (which don't give a good idea of what to expect). Many thanks in advance.

Not good compared to the original books ( www.goodreads.com/review/show/7197649027 ): 2/5

Short version: To quote a review of The Last Airbender, "I'm sorry, I'm really sorry, I know it gets really annoying every single time I say "in the show", because it's an adaptation. Adaptations, you gotta make changes, I understand that, I really understand that, but... it's gotta be changes that make sense, guys!" Not that The Magic School Bus is the worst edutainment adaptation, but I just don't think it holds a candle to the original books.

Long version: Read on.

1stly, just to clarify, I originally wrote this review for the Field Trip Fun & Games DVD ( www.deviantart.com/jd-man/journal/Review-update-8-Repost-1098450873 ). However, for whatever reason, I can't update the outdated parts. So instead, I'm applying an updated version of this review to Weyn's The Magic School Bus: All Dried Up: A Book About Deserts (which is based directly on the episode of the same name & thus has many of the below problems).*

2ndly, as you may have noticed, I usually review non-fiction books. That's because non-fiction books are more structured than other forms of edutainment (& thus, easier for me to review). However, I feel so strongly about The Magic School Bus that I had to make an exception. In this review, I list the 4 main reasons why I think the show compares so poorly to the original books while using "The Busasaurus" (henceforth TB) & "In the Time of the Dinosaurs" (henceforth Time) as examples.

1) In Time, Ms. Frizzle, Liz, & Arnold are the only well-defined/developed characters (E.g. We learn that Ms. Frizzle's 1st name is Valerie & that she went to high school with Jeff, her paleontologist friend). The non-Arnold kids are basically wallpaper. The same goes for the original books in general. On the show, the good characters are even better developed (E.g. Ms. Frizzle is basically the female Willy Wonka), while the not-so-good characters are almost exclusively defined by their catchphrases & range from bland to awful: On the bland side, there's Tim, who's basically the Franklin to the show's Peanuts (I.e. He doesn't even have his own catchphrase); On the awful side, there's Carlos, who's basically a Fox News anchor (I.e. An arrogant, obnoxious, fear/hate-mongering bigot). TB in particular shows the good characters at their best (E.g. Arnold saves the class from a T. rex) & the not-so-good characters at their worst (E.g. Carlos spouts anti-dino speeches at every available opportunity).

2) In Time, most of the ornithischians & some of the saurischians are depicted with wonky hand &/or foot anatomy. Otherwise, the animals are mostly accurate for the time. The same goes for the original books in general, but not the show. TB in particular fails in the following ways:
-Pteranodon is depicted as being naked & living inland despite the facts that 1) pterosaurs in general were fuzzy, & 2) Pteranodon in particular lived in coastal areas.
-All the dinos (except Ornithomimus), are depicted with wonky hand &/or foot anatomy.
-Alamosaurus, Parasaurolophus, Triceratops, & Troodon are depicted as being flat-footed despite the fact that dinos were toe-walkers.
-Alamosaurus is depicted with a mouth full of teeth that all look like flat molars despite the fact that sauropods' teeth were either spoon-shaped or pencil-shaped.
-The Parasaurolophus sounds are just plain wrong (See 10:00 onward: https://archive.org/details/a-e-dinosaur-with-walter-cronkite/1991+A%26E+Dinosaur!+(with+Walter+Cronkite)+-+03+The+Tale+Of+An+Egg.mp4 ).
-Parasaurolophus is depicted with no sexual dimorphism despite the fact that females "had a shorter more curved crest so they could be distinguished within the herd" (See Gardom/Milner's "The Natural History Museum Book of Dinosaurs").
-Troodon & T. rex are depicted as roaring/screaming/whatever "as they attack their prey[...]Anyone who's watched how carefully their cat goes after a flock of sparrows can attest that if you make any noise at all they'll go flying" ( https://web.archive.org/web/20081003042545/https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NoisyNature ).
-Troodon is depicted as being a big-game hunter despite the fact that troodonts "have relatively lightly built snouts, suggesting that they did not tackle very large prey" ( https://web.archive.org/web/20090428141305/http://www.geol.umd.edu:80/~tholtz/G104/lectures/104eumani.html ).
-Troodon & T. rex are depicted as regarding humans as food (See the Dietrich quote).
-T. rex is depicted as being a super-persistent predator despite the fact that it "had clearly sacrificed speed to size. If it did not catch its quarry in the first rush there was no question of setting off in a lengthy pursuit" (See Gardom/Milner's "The Natural History Museum Book of Dinosaurs").
-Ornithomimus is depicted as being carnivorous despite the fact that it was probably omnivorous.

3) In both Time & TB, the class visits Ms. Frizzle's paleontologist friend at a dino dig. However, the similarity ends there: On the 1 hand, in Time, the class travels back to the Late Cretaceous Period "to look for some Maiasaura nests" because "paleontologists have uncovered the bones of some Maiasaura[...], but are disappointed that they haven't found any nests" ( https://web.archive.org/web/20220817123826/https://www.publishersweekly.com/9780590446884 ); We learn that "Dinosaurs Were Special" compared to "today's reptiles" (E.g. "Some dinosaurs may have been warm-blooded. All of today's reptiles are cold-blooded"); On the other hand, in TB, the class travels back to the Late Cretaceous Period "to see what those ancient reptiles[...]were really like" because Carlos brought up his "prejudices and preconceptions about dinosaurs" ( https://web.archive.org/web/20240508051135/https://www.abebooks.com/9786304400685/Magic-School-Bus-Busasaurus-VHS-6304400683/plp ); We learn that "there are more plant eaters than meat eaters. The meat eaters wanted a quick meal without getting hurt. They were not blood thirsty monsters" ( http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/nttidb/lessons/as/dinoas.html ). I have 3 major problems with TB's story-related changes:** 1) T. rex shouldn't have replaced Maiasaura as the main dino; For 1, T. rex is the most overexposed & overstudied dino; For another, a cameo like in Time (I.e. 1 T. rex turns its head & glances at the class, but otherwise pays no mind to them) would've made more sense given TB's lesson; 2) TB, among other episodes, shouldn't have been based around Carlos's prejudices & preconceptions (See "Considering Effects in Context" for why: https://archive.ph/Ryk8R ); 3) All carnivorous dinos shouldn't have been depicted as being dangerous & all herbivorous dinos shouldn't have been depicted as being friendly because, to quote Bakker (See "Maximum Triceratops", which I reviewed: www.goodreads.com/review/show/3484884728 ), "that's wrong. In nature today, the most dangerous critters on land are huge, strong vegetarians. African elephants charge lions and try to squash their cubs. Black rhinos use their long horns to spear hyenas. Hippos use their big teeth to chop crocodiles in half."

4) In Time, the epilogue consists of 2 pages in which Cole & Degen recognize some major falsehood in the story (E.g. "A BUS CAN'T BECOME A TIME MACHINE") & expand on what we learn from the story (E.g. "Birds are the dinosaurs of today"). The same goes for the original books in general. On the show, the epilogue consists of 3 minutes (including the completely pointless & slightly racist intro) in which the producers or guest stars do the same thing while taking phone calls from kids. I have 2 major problems with the show's epilogue: 1) Unlike the book's epilogue (which concentrates on expansion), the show's epilogue gives equal time to recognition; 2) The show's epilogue fails to cover many story-related subjects & those that are covered are done so in an insufficient manner (I.e. Sometimes, it's simplified to the point of being meaningless; Other times, it's just plain wrong). TB in particular fails in the following ways:
-In reference to the 1st caller's 1st question, Carmina says that "nobody's ever seen a real live" dino while ignoring birds.
-In reference to the 1st caller's 2nd question, Carmina says that "the plant eaters[...]had flat grinding teeth, and the meat eaters had pointy cutting teeth", ignoring the facts that 1) not all herbivorous dinos had "grinding teeth", 2) not all carnivorous dinos had "cutting teeth", & 3) not all dinos had teeth (E.g. Ornithomimus).
-In reference to the 2nd caller's 1st question, Carmina says that "no one knows exactly how [dinos] behaved or what they sounded like" & that "we use our imaginations and make educated guesses", ignoring the facts that 1) trace fossils are literally "records of prehistoric behavior" ( https://web.archive.org/web/20150911173940/https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/dinosaurs-without-bones-anthony-j-martin/1114836014 ), 2) we know exactly what Parasaurolophus, the dino that inspired said question, sounded like (See reason #2 above), & 3) paleontologists don't just use their imaginations, but also make "frequent reference to today's animals as a basis for comparison" ( www.amazon.co.uk/Natural-History-Museum-Book-Dinosaurs/dp/184442183X ).
-The 2nd half of the epilogue is wasted on the 2nd caller's 2nd question ("So no one's ever traveled back in time?").

*E.g. It's based around Carlos's prejudices & preconceptions. Also, many of the animals don't look/act like their real-life counterparts. You can see what I mean by comparing "All Dried Up" ( https://archive.org/details/msbmaster/13+All+Dried+Up.mkv ) & the "Road Runner" episode of Wild Kratts ( https://archive.org/details/wild-kratts-season-1-s-01-e-01-mom-of-a-croc/Wild+Kratts+Season+6_S06E07_Road+Runner.mp4 ).

**Just to clarify, I don't have a problem with all of TB's changes. In fact, I like that Carmina replaced Jeff as Ms. Frizzle's paleontologist friend given that there aren't enough "female characters with personalities" in cartoons ( http://babbletrish.blogspot.com/2013/03/revisiting-my-little-pony-friendship-is.html ).

Quoting Dietrich ( https://web.archive.org/web/20230831100312/https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=19950920&slug=2142621 ):

To get an understanding for "Raptor Red" he studied and thought about not just birds of prey but hyenas, wolves and lions. So what would happen to a human who was time-transported back to the Cretaceous?
"All the meat-eaters would flee," Bakker predicted. "Modern hunters such as lions, if they see something they have not been previously aware of, they run away. It's just too risky to attack."

[HD-man]

My 115th review for this thread is a positive 1. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Like"/"Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Like"/"Helpful" votes it can get b/c it's for a great book that deserves more attention. Many thanks in advance.

Mostly great ( https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/7373013005 ): 5/5

As you may remember, Norman's When Dinosaurs Ruled the Earth is both his best children's book & 1 of the then-best children's Natural Histories of Dinos ( www.goodreads.com/review/show/3519227469 ). Likewise, Dinosaur! (henceforth Dino!) is both his best adult book & 1 of the then-best adult NHDs. In fact, aspects of Dino! remind me of the best adult NHDs of all time:
-Like the 1993 edition of Gardom/Milner's The Natural History Museum Book of Dinosaurs, Dino! begins with fossil preservation & ends with the author's work on a particular dino (I.e. Baryonyx & Iguanodon, respectively), using said work as a vehicle to address a broader range of topics in a fun, full-circle kind of way.
-Like Naish/Barrett's Dinosaurs: How They Lived and Evolved, Dino! is very comprehensive. This is especially apparent in the middle chapters of both books (I.e. 3-4 & 4-5, respectively), which are both the longest & the most interesting (which makes sense, given that they cover biology/ecology/behavior).
-Like the above books, Dino! is very well-illustrated by Sibbick (E.g. See the cover), among other great paleoartists.
-While not backed by a dino museum like the above books, Dino! IS "based on the acclaimed four-part television series hosted by Walter Cronkite". In retrospect, I'm surprised there wasn't an audio edition narrated by Cronkite, given that he's "the perfect host – serious without being overly so, utterly credible, charming and avuncular" ( https://chasmosaurs.com/2021/05/12/vintage-dinosaur-tellydinosaur/ ).

Besides a few weird bits in the paleoart (E.g. Robinson's "eyebrow-raisingly all-too-familiar" dinos: https://chasmosaurs.com/2021/04/27/vintage-dinosaur-art-dinosaur/ ), my only gripe is Norman's overly-conservative attitude near the beginning & end of Dino!, especially when comparing Bakker's The Dinosaur Heresies & GSPaul's Predatory Dinosaurs of the World to Horner/Gorman's Digging Dinosaurs & Norman's The Prehistoric World of the Dinosaurs ( https://archive.ph/PXAGa ):*
-Bakker's book is described as a "summary of [his] very particular views", yet Horner's is described as a "personal and interesting review of [his] discovery[...]and research", which seems like a double standard, especially since the former has MUCH "more historical context" & MUCH "more discussion of arguments" (See the Wilford quote).
-GSPaul's book is described as "heavily influenced by the author's own views. He is first and foremost a dinosaur artist," which kinda comes off as condescending/back-handed, similar to Jenkins's review of Agustí/Antón's book (See page 88: www.palass.org/sites/default/files/media/publications/newsletters/number_52/number52.pdf ).** In this case, GSPaul "has taken pains to[...]set a high standard as both an author and an illustrator" (See the Wilford quote).
-Norman's book is described as "well illustrated", which is only half true at best ( https://chasmosaurs.com/2021/08/10/vintage-dinosaur-art-the-prehistoric-world-of-the-dinosaur/ ).

*In reference to "overly-conservative", "the 'feathered dinosaur' issue during the 1980s" ( https://web.archive.org/web/20121107122101/http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/tetrapod-zoology/2012/11/05/great-dinosaur-art-event-of-2012/ ) is especially noteworthy for how dismissive Norman was compared to his colleagues (E.g. Compare the Norman quote to the Gardom/Milner quote).

**For Antón's response (See page 55): www.palass.org/sites/default/files/media/publications/newsletters/number_53/number53.pdf

Quoting Wilford (See "THE GOOD MOTHER LIZARD": https://web.archive.org/web/20150525092115/https://www.nytimes.com/1988/12/25/books/the-good-mother-lizard.html ):

With these discoveries Mr. Horner has moved to the forefront in shaping paleontology's revisionist view of dinosaurs. The sluggish, lumbering, dimwitted beasts of popular lore are being replaced by more agile, complex and successful creatures, unlike any modern reptiles. After all, they must have been doing something right to have survived in such number and diversity for more than 140 million years[...]
The book's brevity is also appropriate, for Mr. Horner's reticence is legendary. However, some readers might wish for more historical context for Mr. Horner's discoveries and more discussion of arguments that call into question some of the revisionist thinking. He mainly sticks to what he knows best, the good mother lizards[...]
''Predatory Dinosaurs of the World'' by Gregory S. Paul is an entirely different kind of book. Whereas Mr. Horner specializes in plant-eating dinosaurs, Mr. Paul, an independent researcher and illustrator, concentrates on those dinosaurs that preyed on herbivores and others. Moreover, he takes on the more ambitious task of providing a compendium of all that is known about the vital statistics of the predators from Coelophysis to Tyrannosaurus.
Although he gives a thorough review of current thinking and the latest discoveries about dinosaurs, including the warmblooded controversy, more than half of the book is a catalogue of all the species, with meticulous drawings by the author. ''Many dinosaur restorations, whether illustrations or models, are so bad that they make me cringe,'' Mr. Paul writes. He has taken pains to correct these misimpressions and set a high standard as both an author and an illustrator.

Quoting Norman:

The small endothermic dinosaur has similar problems to the large ectotherm, again because it lacked a layer of insulating fur or feathers. Even though these dinosaurs were capable of generating body heat internally they would have been unable to control the rate at which they lost heat through the skin to the air. Thus while they could cope with short-term local changes in temperature, global climate deterioration would have affected them just as badly.

Quoting Gardom/Milner (See their 1993 book):

Why feathers? It is generally agreed that birds evolved from small meat-eating theropod dinosaurs. Obviously these dinosaurs did not sprout feathers overnight and become birds, so there must have been a long period when some of the small theropods were experimenting with feathers, which are only a different version of scales.

[HD-man]

My 116th review for this thread is a negative 1. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Like"/"Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Like"/"Helpful" votes it can get because it's outnumbered by opposing reviews (which don't give a good idea of what to expect). Many thanks in advance.

The new ANTI-science of dinos ( www.goodreads.com/review/show/7386585180 ): 1/5

As you may remember from my Feduccia-related reviews ( www.goodreads.com/review/show/5252511712 ), BANDits are basically the paleo equivalent of creationists & global warming deniers ( https://dinosaurpalaeo.wordpress.com/2011/10/08/banditry-creationism-and-global-warming-denial/ ). Similarly, Ford is basically the paleo equivalent of a flat earther. Ford's dino work in general & Too Big to Walk in particular is so bad that 1) NHBS only sold it with a Surgeon General-esque warning ( https://archive.ph/ZOv7u ), & 2) Naish has had to dissect it 4 separate times:
-"Palaeontology bites back..."
-"Brian J. Ford's Aquatic Dinosaurs, 2014 Edition".
-"A Vast Quantity of Evidence Confirms That Non-Bird Dinosaurs Were Not Aquatic".
-"The Response to and Rejection of Brian Ford's Too Big to Walk, a 21st Century Effort to Reinstate the Aquatic Dinosaur Hypothesis".

1 more thing of note: I recently re-read Bakker's The Dinosaur Heresies (which includes proof "for a terrestrial habitat for sauropods": https://sci-hub.ru/https://www.jstor.org/stable/2400253 ). It's a long read for a popular work, but still a highly recommended one, especially in conjunction with Naish/Barrett's Dinosaurs: How They Lived and Evolved, another great Natural History of Dinos ( www.goodreads.com/review/show/3505614509 ), & Naish's Dinopedia, another great Dino Rennaissance-perspective book ( www.goodreads.com/review/show/4960975366 ).

[HD-man]

Mostly good, part 1 ( www.goodreads.com/review/show/3510412805 ): 4/5

Hone's The Tyrannosaur Chronicles: The Biology of the Tyrant Dinosaurs (henceforth TC) is mostly good, especially when it comes to describing key scientific concepts (E.g. Classification in Part 1). I say that because, unlike most of my positive reviews, this 1 is about TC's problems.

You can read the rest of this review on Goodreads.

The worst popular baby dino book ( www.goodreads.com/review/show/3515814498 ): 1/5

Short version: If you want the best baby dino book for older kids, get Zoehfeld's Dinosaur Parents, Dinosaur Young: Uncovering the Mystery of Dinosaur Families & read it in conjunction with other, more recent books (E.g. Holtz's Dinosaurs in general & Chapter 36 in particular). Brooklyn's If You Were Raised by a Dinosaur (henceforth You) may be the worst. It just goes to show what a difference some expert consulting & personal research can make.

You can read the rest of this review on Goodreads.

For those who didn't notice, I updated my 45th & 52nd reviews: https://www.deviantart.com/jd-man/art/Review-updates-45-and-52-Repost-1210364619

[HD-man]

My 117th review for this thread is a positive 1. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Like"/"Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Like"/"Helpful" votes it can get b/c it's for a good book that deserves more attention. Many thanks in advance.

So close, yet so dino-far ( www.goodreads.com/review/show/7707004061 ): 4/5

I originally expected to like Hone's Uncovering Dinosaur Behavior: What They Did and How We Know (henceforth UD) more than Lomax's "Locked in Time" (which I reviewed: www.goodreads.com/review/show/6991349141 ), partly because UD focuses on dinos & partly because it's illustrated by Ugueto (whose art style works MUCH better in black-&-white than Nicholls's)...However, if I had to pick between recommending 1 book or the other, I'd pick Lomax's. While both are good books with problems that keep them from being great, Lomax's book problems seem like the inevitable frustrations of publishing. Meanwhile, UD's problems seem MUCH more avoidable, making it all the more frustrating how close-yet-far it is from greatness (hence the title of this review)...

You can read the rest of this review on Goodreads.

[HD-man]

My 118th review for this thread is a negative 1. If you haven't already, I'd greatly appreciate you reading & voting "Like"/"Helpful" for said review in the bolded link below. Besides wanting to make sure said review gives a good idea of what to expect, it needs all the "Like"/"Helpful" votes it can get because it's outnumbered by opposing reviews (which don't give a good idea of what to expect). Many thanks in advance.

Nicholls deserves better ( www.goodreads.com/review/show/7708087631 ): 2/5

As far as I know, Chapter 4 of Naish/Barrett's Dinosaurs: How They Lived and Evolved (which I reviewed: www.goodreads.com/review/show/3505614509 ) is the best summary of dino behavior, in large part because of Naish's writing. To quote Naish ( https://darrennaish.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/naish-2021-becoming-a-science-writer-bsr.pdf ), "writing of any sort is a slow business. Everything takes forever. Most authors we consider good and trustworthy take time to generate content, sometimes a lot of time. Authors who can generate many thousands of words a day[...]are either truly remarkable people, unlike the rest of us, or are churning out shallow, low-quality work that will not be appreciated or used down the line." Unfortunately, Benton's popular work is mostly the latter. This has become especially apparent in recent years with the back-to-back publication of Dinosaurs Rediscovered: The Scientific Revolution in Paleontology, Dinosaurs: New Visions of a Lost World, & Dinosaur Behavior: An Illustrated Guide (henceforth DB). In this review, I list the 4 main reasons why I think DB is especially shallow & low quality.

You can read the rest of this review on Goodreads.