I think that the Raptors from Jurassic Park were actually velociraptors. I think so because the InGen Field Journal (wrote by Laura Sorkin) states: "They're definitely velociraptors, but based on size alone, they appear to have more in common with Utharaptor or Deynonichus". Velociraptor, along with Itemirus, Adasaurus and Tsaagan, belong to the subfamily Velociraptorinae, while Deinonychus belong to its own subfamily and Dromaeosaurus, Utharaptor and Achillobator belong to Dromaeosaurinae.
The Raptors from Jurassic Park could have been dromaeosaurs, but the clones in the park were probably velociraptors.
Sorkin is a biased source, and even the Developers of JPTG said that everything she says should be taken with a block of salt to go along with it.
JurassicWorld.com says the 5m long Velociraptors are from Mongolia. Look here -> http://www.jurassicworld.com/dinosaurs/velociraptor/
It also says that the iRex is made up a several Abelisaurs and Giganotosaurus, and that the Raptors are 15ft long. Other sources (including the movie) have proven this false. Keep in mind the viral sites are meant to be in universe sites that the tourists would find informational. They're more like the brochure from JP than they are actual encylcopedic information. They're a front. The Apatosaurus logo uses a Brachiosaurus silhouette, the Parasaurolophus profile image uses an artistic drawing that is not how the Para looks in the movie (in the movie, they're the TLW coloration), the wingspan for the Pteranodons is listed as 18ft, when in the movie they're clearly much smaller. Also, keep in mind that the Jack Ewin's team for the site were advised by paleontologist Brian Switek, who would be more interested in supplying more real world information than in-universe information.
@Jhayk' Sulliy
I am not saying your hypothesis is invalid.
Sure, there are errors on the websites. Dito for my university study material, and everything else manmade. Just because a media has errors, that doesn't give us permission to discard everything it says when it does not suit our hypotheses. We are at the mercy of what we can extract from the film and associated media. On many places the sources say the JP raptors are Velociraptors from Mongolia. Because of this, I do not believe anyone can be dogmatic about the raptors being a species from Montana (nor that they actually are from Mongolia).
Jhayk' Sulliy wrote: It also says that the iRex is made up a several Abelisaurs and Giganotosaurus... Other sources (including the movie) have proven this false.
I don't see how the animals listed on the website that were used in the creation of Indominus are false. The teeth of Indominus are like that of Giganotosaurus and other carcharodontosaurs. Indominus has horns that are similar to Majungasaurus and Carnotaurus.
Plus, there have been sources to back up the website's information about Indominus. Take, for instance, the post on Universal Home Entertainment's Tumblr that confirms Carnotaurus and Giganotosaurus. Colin Trevorrow also said in an interview with Entertainment Weekly that Majungasaurus and Giganotosaurus was used in its creation.
Word of God aside, no official source has stated that Giganotosaurus nor Majungasaurus were used. Also, keep in mind, that in that interview he's speaking in terms of the viral site. This is later retconned in the official infographic that Universal Studios put out. The teeth are actually more conical in shape than any semblance to an Allosauroid shape. They definitely get their shape from the conical teeth found in Tyrannosaurs than they do the steak knife teeth found in Allosauroidae.
Jhayk' Sulliy wrote:
Word of God aside, no official source has stated that Giganotosaurus nor Majungasaurus were used. Also, keep in mind, that in that interview he's speaking in terms of the viral site. This is later retconned in the official infographic that Universal Studios put out. The teeth are actually more conical in shape than any semblance to an Allosauroid shape. They definitely get their shape from the conical teeth found in Tyrannosaurs than they do the steak knife teeth found in Allosauroidae.
The tip of the tooth has that blunt look like you see in carcharodontosaurids and is straight instead of curved like a Tyrannosaurus tooth. Here's a prop that was made for the movie, but never used on screenshot that seems identical to the one seen in the screen for comparison. Of course, you have to keep in mind that this is a hybrid.
I recognize this prop. It was sold by an eBay seller that also sold me a fake "production used" Bull T. rex tooth. It came with some shitty hand made COA. It's clearly not from the same mold as the screen used prop as seen in the image I posted above. The tell-tale give away for me that shows this was a fake is the way the back of the tooh "bends" instead of flowing in a natural curve. The T. rex tooth I bought off this guy (pictured right) looked legit, too. Accurate paint detailing on the bottom, painted on placement number, even flecks of dried glue on the screw, but believe me it was a fake. The truth is, there were no production teeth made. There was a single prop made, the one Pratt holds in the movie. However, there would be none made with drill holes. There was no animatronic made for the iRex, thus no where to put teeth with drill holes into.
Now, I also happen to have in my possession, a replica Carcharodontosaurus tooth, and a replica "Sue" the T. rex tooth (one of the original runs). On the left is the Carcharodontosaurus tooth, on the right is the Sue tooth. I took pictures of both the serrated and the flat sides off the teeth. The Carcharodontosaurus tooth is a classic Allosauroid tooth: flat, sharp, serated edges, perfect for slicing into flesh like a newly sharpened bowie knife. The T. rex tooth, on the other hand, is conical. It's like a thick, curved, railroad spike. In other words, it's exactly like the iRex tooth. Look at the teeth in the screenshot. Big, round, cones. They're not flat slicers, they're big cones made to puncture.
Sorry for the late reply.
Jhayk' Sulliy wrote:
I recognize this prop. It was sold by an eBay seller that also sold me a fake "production used" Bull T. rex tooth. It came with some shitty hand made COA. It's clearly not from the same mold as the screen used prop as seen in the image I posted above. The tell-tale give away for me that shows this was a fake is the way the back of the tooh "bends" instead of flowing in a natural curve. The T. rex tooth I bought off this guy (pictured right) looked legit, too. Accurate paint detailing on the bottom, painted on placement number, even flecks of dried glue on the screw, but believe me it was a fake. The truth is, there were no production teeth made. There was a single prop made, the one Pratt holds in the movie. However, there would be none made with drill holes. There was no animatronic made for the iRex, thus no where to put teeth with drill holes into.
Now, I also happen to have in my possession, a replica Carcharodontosaurus tooth, and a replica "Sue" the T. rex tooth (one of the original runs). On the left is the Carcharodontosaurus tooth, on the right is the Sue tooth. I took pictures of both the serrated and the flat sides off the teeth. The Carcharodontosaurus tooth is a classic Allosauroid tooth: flat, sharp, serated edges, perfect for slicing into flesh like a newly sharpened bowie knife. The T. rex tooth, on the other hand, is conical. It's like a thick, curved, railroad spike. In other words, it's exactly like the iRex tooth. Look at the teeth in the screenshot. Big, round, cones. They're not flat slicers, they're big cones made to puncture.
Thanks for the heads up on the prop.
I stand corrected on the teeth of Indominus. The teeth are very conical like T. rex and not like the carcharodontosaurid teeth that you have posted on this thread. I have since removed the false information on the Indominus rex. Thank you for debating this with me.
Jhayk' Sulliy wrote: Also, keep in mind, that in that interview he's speaking in terms of the viral site.
As for the canonically of the viral website, I read the entire EW interview and not once was the website ever mentioned and I didn't seen any indication that it was about the website. There is the statement at the beginning of the article that says that Indominus is 50ft long and 18ft high, but that comes from the LEGO website, not JurassicWorld.com. Plus, the LEGO website's info about the raptors were vindicated in Empire magazine, so the LEGO website has some canonically to it.
If you wish to discuss this further I advice to make a separate thread about it as we are going off-topic on this thread.