this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2025
1470 points (98.9% liked)

Science Memes

15755 readers
2937 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 32 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

Stories about "science gone awry" are almost always about non-scientists screwing up.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 14 points 22 hours ago

https://jurassicpark.fandom.com/wiki/Dennis_Nedry

Dennis Theodore[1] Nedry was the main antagonist during the first half of the original Jurassic Park film. He was a computer programmer at Jurassic Park. Due to his financial problems and low salary, he accepted a bribe from Biosyn to smuggle dinosaur embryos off the island.

In both the film and the novel, he is slain by a Dilophosaurus. He was directly responsible for the events that happened in both the novel and film. A combination of factors led to his demise: despite working in a career around dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures, he had a limited knowledge of them, and greed, which was intertwined by desperation to pay off his debt collectors and make himself rich after that.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 29 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

The science also went wrong a lil bit. The Dinos weren't supposed to be able to breed being all females; but they used frog DNA so some the dinos ended up turning into males and began breeding.

Seems like the "dire wolf" and "wooly mammoth" thing happened even in fiction; they weren't actually dinosaurs. They were frogs that looked like dinosaurs.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 2 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

strange they dint use bird eggs, or reptiles, as amphibians are pretty far removed from a dinosaur , distantly related.

[–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 3 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

In the books, and movie iirc, they used DNA from all three, not just frogs, to replace missing segments of the dino DNA.

It was just that Dr.Grant guessed at it being amphibian DNA that had the unintentional side effect of allowing some of the dinos to change sex (which is a thing called sequential hermaphroditism) when he finds the velociraptor eggs.

[–] darkpanda@lemmy.ca 23 points 1 day ago

It never would have happened if they just had stronger laws preventing the dinos from having easy access to gender affirming care.

[–] doomcanoe@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago

You are under the assumption the scientists listened to the bean counters. I on the otherhand think it's more likely that any (mad) scientist who could make dinofrogs via genetic manipulation would intentionally splice the ability to self-transition into their creation.

"Demand I make my dinofrogs infertile will you!? I'll show you... I'll show all of you!!!"

[–] Ganbat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I mean, it's about both, but... do people really not catch the whole angle about capitalism and greed? Newman straight up gets everyone killed for a pay day, and doesn't even make it out himself. The only way it could be more obvious is if it had giant flash red text.

[–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 7 points 13 hours ago

Majority of people rarely engage with any media beyond the surface to actually analyze it and come to those conclusions about the deeper themes. Most just think "well, that's just people being people" and fail to see the social commentary.

[–] blackbirdbiryani@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

More a reflection of people's attention spans these days compared to when the movie is released. Read any online discussion about media and it seems like people are on their phones for 40% of the show at minimum.

Hell the original film would probably not do well if released today because it doesn't have the obvious shoehorned plot points that the new movies have to cut through the morons.

[–] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 5 points 23 hours ago

There were plenty of morons in the 80s and 90s. Half the population suffered from severe lead poisoning. The other half were hopped up on neo liberal propaganda.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 151 points 1 day ago (15 children)

I've long found the notion that the lesson of Jurassic Park, if a fictional story like that must be taken to have one, should be something like "science/genetic engineering is bad" or "you can't control nature" to be a bit silly, given that, well, it's a zoo. With pretty big animals, to be sure, but dinosaurs were animals still, not kaiju or dragons or whatever other fantasy monster, and some genetically modified to be somewhat bigger and lack feathers would still be such. It's a story about some people building a zoo badly because they didn't do their due diligence about the animals they had and cheaped out on staff and the systems they had for containing the animals, and somehow people get the take away that "these animals are special and can't be safely contained" rather than "letting rich people cheap out on safety is a bad idea".

Were one to write a broadly similar story where someone cheaps out on a park containing elephants and tigers, and they get out and maul some people, it'd be obvious, but give the tigers scales and make them born in a lab and suddenly it's a monster movie.

[–] dovahking@lemmy.world 1 points 12 hours ago

That was the thing that always broke the immersion for me. Our ancestors hunted the mammoths with just spears and a hole in the ground. And you're telling me that modern technology can't come up with a way to properly neutralize or contain a dinosaur?

[–] MyNameIsIgglePiggle@sh.itjust.works 69 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Hard agree. My takeaway is the moral of the story is always do quality engineering. There have been like 10 movies and they still don't know how to construct an enclosure.

[–] MajorMajormajormajor@lemmy.ca 42 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Why do they always only have one massive entrance to each enclosure? Why is it large enough for the Dinosaur to walk out of? Why don't they have two doors in series, airlock style?

[–] blazeknave@lemmy.world 37 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They do it for butterflies at museums...

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 29 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Well you can't have butterflies escaping into nature. They'll wreak havoc by pollinating everything.

[–] zedgeist@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

pollinate me uwu

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Where I'm from, when engineers complete their certification they get an iron ring made from the material of a collapsed bridge. This is remind them to not become arrogant and think about everything that could go wrong.

You wouldn't be able to find a good engineer to design a park for animals no one really knows the behaviour of. Hammond would have to hire the people in this thread who think "yeah we could design something that will contain these animals, no problem at all!"

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

Wasn't the issue with Indominus rex that the dinosaur tricked them into thinking it was gone and they left the door open, like idiots? Definitely some things in those movies are engineering issues, but it mostly was a problem because there were multiple points of failure in the system. This is the point I make about my work. My department catches behavior problems from reports, discussions, interviews, and providing technical assistance. We do tons of work regularly and there are overlapping ways to catch the same problem. When my department is given more work and no new staff, they can't stay on top of everything. They still catch things because the work they are able to do usual catches one of the multiple opportunities. With enough workload added on eventually you end up missing something. When the stakes are life and death, you have multiple layers of protection programmed into the system.

[–] tyler@programming.dev 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

But it’s not a zoo, like even in the slightest. It’s a theme park.

They don’t have a full dinosaur genome so they literally make stuff up. Not only that, but just like with the Colossal Bioscience stuff that’s literally happening right now, there’s no learning for these brought-back-to-life creatures so they will not behave anything like their actual prehistoric counterparts. It is bad science because there’s no reason to be doing the science at all. It won’t replicate anything from the past (for so so so many reasons) and it has so many unethical things to get past before it’s even slightly in -eh- territory.

[–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 4 points 13 hours ago

It is bad science because there’s no reason to be doing the science at all

This just rounds itself back to capitalism being the problem because the science was being done for a reason: to generate profit for Hammond.

Bad science is usually always conducted to suit the ends of someone trying to use the results for manipulative/exploitative purposes.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 37 points 1 day ago (2 children)

If anything Jurassic park is basically a lesson in properly vetting your staff.

Everything that happened happened because Dennis was the only IT guy and basically could do whatever he wanted with zero oversight. It's not like the dinosaurs were going to break out on their own, even the raptors only got out because the fences were turned off.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 26 points 1 day ago

He was getting paid peanuts for designing and building an essential system for the running of the park all on his own, working for a guy that constantly bragged about sparing no expense.

IIRC the only interaction between Hammond and Nerdy went something like "you should have negotiated a better contract! Stfu gbtw", which can pretty much sum up the whole wealth divide between the owners who gain most of the benefit and the workers who actually do the things under capitalism. Except if they aren't getting the better of everyone on average, they just shut the whole thing down or find others that they do get the better of.

[–] CitizenKong@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It still comes down to Hammond not paying Nedry enough although he claimed he "spared no expenses".

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] svcg@lemmy.blahaj.zone 27 points 1 day ago

Jurassic Park is about capitalist hubris.

Jurassic World is about why we should not allow BD Wong to create the reptilian equivalent of the torment nexus.

[–] But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world 37 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Hammond literally goes around gaslighting the entire group by saying “spared no expense” when in reality he cheaped out and cut every corner. His undoing was Dennis, who was the lowest bidder in a security contract. Instead of picking the absolute best, Hammond went with the lowest bidders. Even the T. rex fence should not have been so easy to break down, power or not. The entire park was built cheap and fast. Hammond was a capitalist playing conservationist.

[–] aarRJaay@lemmy.world 35 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No no no, it's all about paying your IT people well and being nice to them. If John had been nice to Needry, then Needry wouldn't have needed to betray him. Pay your IT people, be nice to them and everything would have been fine.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] JimVanDeventer@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I saw one of the more recent-ish movies. One of the dinosaurs removed its subdermal tracking device and the humans find it because it has a big blinking light bulb on it. A big blinking light bulb on a subdermal tracker. Are these movies self aware? Was that supposed to be a joke?

[–] Techranger@infosec.pub 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The tracker must have been made by the same manufacturer that makes all those bombs you see in movies, too. You can tell because they have beepers, digital countdown displays, and sometimes also blinking lights.

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I mean, the science did go wrong too. They tried making dinosaurs all one gender but used DNA from an animal that can spontaneously switch genders. Sounds like they fucked up to me.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Anyone that thinks that dinosaurs are amphibians shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a DNA sequencer.

[–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 points 13 hours ago

None of it was because the scientists thought that dinosaurs were amphibians. In the lore of the books, DNA from reptiles, avians, and amphibians were used to fill in gaps in the dino DNA.

The book explains that the DNA used to fill those gap was chosen specifically for certain traits that would make for more attractive or durable creatures for the theme park, highlighting how what was being done "in the name of science" actually had nothing to do with any real scientific progress or discovery.

[–] bramkaandorp@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Without capitalism, maybe they wouldn't have continued when they found out there wasn't enough DNA for complete dinosaurs.

Or maybe they would have had enough time to think things through, and use safer/more appropriate replacement DNA.

Just spit balling.

[–] bhamlin@lemmy.world 21 points 1 day ago

Yeah, "good enough to keep making money" is a very capitalist mindset.

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 56 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (12 children)

So... in the actual book(s), the problem is a bit of both.

The 'science' goes wrong because... well, they do not have complete dinosaur genome sequences.

And they fill in the gaps with a lot of DNA from a certain kind of frog.

A frog, that is later discovered to change its sex, transform from female into male, in environments/situations that are not sufficiently male/female balanced.

The explanation as to why the dinosaurs will not be a problem is that they only make female ones, so the population will remain exactly as they engineer.

... this does not work, because some of the dinos transform their sex, and begin breeding, which they essentially entirely did not account for.

So... 'the science' absolutely fucked up there.

...

Also in the book(s)... Hammond is much, much more clearly an unscrupulous capitalist... think roughly somebody that would have their accounts managed by Patrick Bateman, or maybe like a modern techbro, but his tech isn't crypto or ai or hyperscaling whatever bs app... its genetic engineering.

(cough 23andMe cough)

The original movie makes him into... much more of a genuinely enthusiastic, but more innocently naive, and sympathetic character... he is much more straightforwardly a thinly veiled corpo asshole in the book.

And because of this, the book punishes him, where the movie basically does not.

In the book, near the end, as it looks like the surviving cast have escaped imminent danger, and is reasonably safe and secure, awaiting rescue...

... Hammond is very directly killed by his own hubris.

He decides he has some better idea about what to do, wanders off from the group, gets lost, and is torn to shreds by a pack of compies, compthagnasus, basically 10 or 20 or so of fairly small, maybe 1.5 foot ish tall tiny versions of velociraptors.

He makes a final, direct, hubristic act, and is literally torn to shreds by thousands of tiny cuts, but all at one time, the figurative recompense for his lifetime of shitty, reckless, self serving decisions.

Critchton was a damn good writer, RIP.

Anyway, the second movie, Lost World... is very, very loosely based on the second book, but it features a compy attack event as an inciting incident, the initial event...

...but they swap it to occuring to basically a completely innocent family who is vacationing on a nearby island, just a totally different and made up set of characters, where its now just some random assholeish wealthy corpo father who is being hubristic, and iirc, a little girl is seriously injured, but not killed...

Its much less hubristic of a bad decision from the father, as he legitimately had no idea this random island was infested with fucking dinosaurs.

Also, iirc, the Lost World movie just throws away these characters, this family, after this gets the plot rolling, I don't think they are ever on screen again.

Its not a well written intro.

...

So the books feature capitalism, capitalists, as another majorly bad thing that fucks up.

The idea as I see is that... these two things, when both unrestrained and pursued recklessly, well one of them would be bad enough on their own, but when you combine both of them, shit gets real bad, real fast, high likelihood of catastrophic co sequences.

Its the 'tech is not inherently good nor evil, it all depends on how a society uses it' line of thinking.

It just says hey, here's a worst case scenario for you to chew on, how seriously you should consider this.

Like maybe a modern version of this would be LLMs.

Theoretically, an LLM on its own, used reasonably, responsibly, can be a tool for arguably mostly good. You could theoretically power one of these things with wind, solar, geothermal, have a societal structure where its provided as a controlled and regulated public good, not a private for profit business.

But when you couple this with the ravenous nature of capitalism, well, a whole fuckton of shit starts cascading out of control into negative consequences... vital processes and info get fucked up by LLMs hallucinating shit and make heuristic decisions en masse that lead to say, millions of people being denied or charged out the ass for healthcare...

Major corporations massively downsize their work forces and replace them with 'good enough' (but not really, actually) LLMs... which then craters demand in a consumption based economy, so now we have a Great Depression 2.0...

And the widespread usage of these things to answer anyones questions and do everyone's home or coursework, means that now humans are net stupifying themselves, as they no longer need to learn how to do critical analysis, research and source verification, etc.

...

Its been a while since I've seen the original movie, fhe first sequel... and then yeah, never saw anything after that, because they just look immensely, increasingly stupid and nonsensical, not even having internal logic that is coherent or consistent... so I can't well comment on how the movie universe has evolved.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 3 points 21 hours ago

The bio science was averaging success. Not their fault that the IT dept fumbled the ball.

[–] Stern@lemmy.world 42 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

if you build a perpetual motion machine and it eats the postman from seinfeld... you still made a perpetual motion machine

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 25 points 1 day ago

gloriously right

Not really. The dinos were half-baked imitations, not exact replicas. And they evolved in ways the scientists didn’t anticipate, because their reach exceeded their grasp.

There’s definitely an anti-capitalist message, but don’t dismiss the warning about prematurely greenlighting high-stakes scientific initiatives. That’s relevant to the modern world, no matter what our economic model is.

LLMs come to mind. There’s a section of the AI-skeptic folks that say the only problem with AI is the profit motive. I’m not so sure. People will use tech to do all kinds of horrible shit even if they don’t stand to materially benefit. Just look at 4chan.

[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 32 points 1 day ago (3 children)

The new movies suck ass because they try to make science the bad guy, but not only is that a shit story we all see through, but it still reads as capitalistic greed and hubris, but now the movie feels like it doesn’t know what it’s talking about.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Zerush@lemmy.ml 31 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

Would be nice to have an pet velociraptor. Never shown correctly in the Jurasic Park movies. They are not bigger than a turkey

[–] gigachad@sh.itjust.works 41 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Looks like he has the perfect size to bite your balls. Not so sure about the pet suggestion

[–] Dutczar@sopuli.xyz 30 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Hey, so are plenty of dogs. Doesn't stop my ball headbashers from being good boys.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)

It's much more clear, especially if you read the book, that JP is about accountability. All throughout the book, as shit's going sideways and people are dying, everyone's playing hot potato with accountability. At the end, Grant forces Genero into investigating a wild raptor nest with him, in spite of Genero's protests that he's "just the lawyer" because somebody has to take some accountability.

load more comments
view more: next ›