That Doesn't Make Sense!

So, I'm rereading Jurassic Park, which is a really, really, really great book. The first time I read it was back when I was in High School, right before the movie came out. I started reading it in home room, and then just left school for the rest of the day so I could go home and finish reading it.

Yeah, it's that good of a book.

I haven't read it since then, but have seen the movie about a million times since then, so it's really like reading a brand new book.

However, I did discover something within the first few chapters that really pissed me off. It's been bugging me since I read it a few days ago.

It's inaccurate! There's fallacies! Damn you, Michael Crichton! You're like this super smart science guy! You shouldn't be doing things like this!

Ok, so here's what I noticed. If you've never read the book, and plan on reading it, you probably shouldn't read the rest of this blog.

The book Jurassic Park starts off the same way the movie The Lost World does. With this family on a deserted beach in Costa Rica, and their little girl gets bit by a Procompsognathid. Little chicken sized dinosaur. They call them "compy" in the book, which is easer to type and spell, so I'll do the same from here on out.

So, everybody at the hospital they take the little girl to thinks that it was just a crazy accident, and that she was bitten by a baslik lizard (the ones that run on their hind legs and have that strange skin thing that flares up around their head). They say that that's been happening a lot lately in the area.

To prove this, we cut scene to a clinic, where a midwife has just delivered a baby. She hears squeaking and chirping coming from the nursery. She goes to check on the newborn baby.

"Elena opened the door. The infant lay in a wicker bassinet, swaddled in a light blanket, only its face exposed."

Ok, we get from this that the baby is wrapped up tightly, and only it's face is showing.

"Around the rim of the bassinet, three dark green lizards crouched like gargoyles. When they saw Elena, they cocked their heads and stared curiously at her, but did not flee. In the light of her flashlight Elena saw the blood dripping from their snouts. Softly chirping, one lizard bend down, and with a quick shake of its head, tore a ragged chunk of flesh from the baby."

Ok, so obviously the lizards tore a giant chunk of flesh from the baby's face. Remember this.

"Elena rushed forward, screaming, and the lizards fled into the darkness. But long before she reached the bassinet, she could see what had happened to the infant's face, and she knew the child must be dead."

So, the lizards killed the baby. All plain and simple there. You can check for yourself, page 26.

Next chapter "The Shape of the Data"

Later, when she was calmer, Elena Morales decided not to report the lizard attack. Despite the horror she had seen, she began to worry that she might be criticized for leaving the baby unguarded. She told the mother that the baby had asphyxiated, and she reported the death on the forms she sent to San Jose as SIDS: sudden infant death syndrome. This was a syndrome of unexplained death among very young children; it was unremarkable, and her report went unchallenged."

Which is all good, except for one thing.

Babies that asphyxiate do not have large chunks of flesh missing from their faces!

Didn't anyone notice that?? Didn't that raise any questions? Did anyone even bother to ask the negligent midwife Elena why the baby's face was missing? Or why the sheets in the bassinet were covered with blood? Do they just not pay attention to this kind of thing in Costa Rica????

What the hell, Crichton? WHAT THE HELL??????

Did the mother not even ask to see the baby when she was told it was dead? Or, did she not even care? What the hell?

I have issues with that. If I ever happen to meet Michael Crichton, I'm going to have to discuss that with him.

But, then, that got me to thinking about the movie. Great movie, BTW. I remember my dad and I stood in line down at the theater at Main Street, in Miami Lakes, to see it the first day it came out.

There was all this hype, because of all the great special effects that were in the flick. And, the special effects did not disappoint. Actually, they should re-release this movie now that they have those real cool theaters w/the stadium seating and the kick ass surround sound.

Anyways, there was this dad with his two young boys standing in line behind us to go see the movie. All the time waiting, the boys are talking about dinosaurs, and how awesome dinosaurs are, and playing dinosaur, and talking about how they would never be afraid of dinosaurs.

They sat behind us during the movie, and when the T-Rex began to attack, them kids were screaming their little heads off. Which was kind of funny, but understandable.

But, anyways, back to what I remember from the movie.

Remember when Grant and the two kids were walking around the park trying to get back to the lodge? They come to the giant electric fence? And, to test to see if it is electrified or not, what does Grant do? He throws a stick up against it.

Now, I may be wrong here, but doesn't wood NOT conduct electricity? So, wouldn't a stick just harmlessly bounce off of the fence even if it was electrified?

Please correct me if I am wrong on this, because that whole scene is bugging me too, now.

Well, I'm off to finish the book and locate more inaccuracies.