Ice Age 3: To Hell with Evolution

The new Ice Age movie — Ice Age 3: Dawn of the Dinosaurs — is set to open next summer.

What problems do you see with the following poster (and the premise of the movie in general)?

ia3enga1sheetrev1hx0

Scientists are going to have a field day with it.

Apparently, dinosaurs are taking over the earth after the Ice Age… Evolution is going backwards, too. Dinosaurs are taking over the saber-toothed tigers and mammoths even though dinosaurs went extinct millions of years before those other animals existed.

Next thing you know, the animals in the movie are going to be talking, too.

Jay is shocked by this:

It’s not like these two types of animals were thousands of years apart… but MILLIONS! Millions and millions and millions of years. 65.5 MILLION! Worst of all, I have been looking online and very few people seem to have picked up on this HUGE mistake. What the fuck.

Of course, no one is looking to Disney Blue Sky Studios for real science education. I hope this movies provides an opportunity for scientists to educate children about what we know about our planet’s history and what’s fictional.

(Thanks to Jay for the link!)

  • Brody

    Ice Age is not Disney. It’s 20th Century Fox. Yes, that’s Fox, as in Newscorp. Makes sense now, doesn’t it?

  • Boštjan

    O.K that’s not cool. If you go in to critizating simple lapsus in movie that make it watchabule you/we/he are no better than religion nuts who see abomination evrywere.

    It is just movie for goodness sake

  • Siamang

    Whooo.

    Where to start with this post, Hemant…

    First off, DISNEY did not make this movie. This is a Blue Sky movie released by 20th Century Fox. As a Disney animator, I’m highly offended that you got that wrong.

    Second off, if you look at the trailer, it is clear that this is a “Lost World” type of story.

    You know… like the Arthur Conan Doyle story where explorers find a remote isolated plateau where dinosaurs still flourish. Are you saying that animated films are not allowed to do a “Land that Time Forgot” storyline? What? Does that suddenly break the believability of what heretofore has been a natural history documentary where mammoths and sloths were friends with saber-tooted cats?

  • Adam

    Its just a movie you guys… maybe we are over reacting a little?

  • http://friendlyatheist.com Hemant Mehta

    First off, DISNEY did not make this movie. This is a Blue Sky movie released by 20th Century Fox. As a Disney animator, I’m highly offended that you got that wrong.

    My bad. Fixed.

  • Siamang

    Oh, and you say “to hell with evolution.” What does evolution have to do with the coexistence of mammals and dinosaurs? If it weren’t for an asteroid, non-avian dinosaurs and mammals would still be in the mix today just as they were 65 million years ago.

    Evolution isn’t a ladder, nor is it a great-chain-of-being. There is no evolutionary reason why dinosaurs would necessarily need to be extinct from the earth in order for the age of mammals to arise.

    You should have said “Ice Age III: To Hell with Asteroids”!

  • JimboB

    I won’t be seeing this movie for the same reasons I didn’t see 10,000 B.C.

    Waaaaaay to many historical inaccuracies.

  • http://darwinsdagger.blogspot.com Darwin’s Dagger

    I thought it was going to be a prequel.

    Dude, movies about talking mammoths who team up with talking saber-tooth tigers don’t exactly have much claim to reality to begin with.

  • http://www.designsapling.com Jeremy White

    I just assumed the movie was about a few dinosaurs would have been stuck in ice themselves somehow and they thawed out.

    I’m waiting to find out what the story is before I pass judgment.

  • mikespeir

    And the head of whatever that sucker is is way bigger that anything discovered heretofore.

  • grazatt

    I won’t be seeing this movie cause it looks like shit.

  • John B

    My ultra-conservative-christian brother loves the movie “300″. His even-more-ultra-conservative pastor refuses to watch it because it’s “historically inaccurate.” Like my brother says, “I ain’t watching it for a history lesson.” One of the few times we agree on something. I totally agree with Darwin’s Dagger- It’s Just A Movie. And an animated kids movie at that.

  • Tyson

    I think this simply falls into the category of “bad science” in movies. Like Star Wars, Armageddon, and Deep Impact, none of these movies should be taken a science lessons.

    Unfortunately, I understand the nature of this ‘bad science’ is different than the others. No one is impacted when the Death Star explodes and you hear a sound. The scientific context that sound waves don’t travel in a vacuum don’t impact our educational policy and laws.

    But of course, evolution does. No one has a vote in school board meetings about whether or not sound exists in a vacuum. But they do with evolution. I think likely though, most people will see the movie and not really give it much of a thought. Even people who understand that evolution is the best model for explaining modern biology may watch the movie and completely miss the scientific inaccuracy.

    Sad what Hollywood is willing to do for a buck though. I don’t really like their world.

  • http://www.doublesingledouble.com amanda

    Dudes, I grew up watching The Flinstones and came out the other side with a firm grasp on reality.

    nevermind that all the animals TALK…

    Like a previous poster said, the movie will be utter crap anyway.

  • Lakafaith

    Hmmmm… Now where have I seen this?

    Oh yes, when the fundies were up in arms because Harry Potter was promoting witchcraft.

    Be calm, take a deep breath… it’s only a movie.

  • Sandra

    My son likes the Ice Age movies. We will see it, and we will point out the errors (to each other) that we notice…just like we do with every movie.

  • http://blargen.com/blog/ postsimian

    “I think this simply falls into the category of “bad science” in movies. Like Star Wars”

    Bad science, huh? *force choke*

    Alright, fine, you win. ¬_¬

    ——-

    Look on the bright side, guys. That’s some awesome fur/skin rendering.

  • Wes

    Well, the commenters saying it’s just a movie are right. I can still enjoy a movie even if it has a lot of scientific inaccuracies in it.

    But I understand Hemant’s concern. Perpetuating such myths as dinosaurs living just a few thousand years ago can be damaging, since unlike other scientific inaccuracies in movies, polls on creationism reflect that roughly 45% of Americans actually believe it. A big-time movie portraying dinosaurs living alongside mammals that existed into the late Pleistocene will only reinforce the myth in many children’s minds. It’s really unfortunate that this bit of nonsense is so pervasive.

    That said, it’s nothing to get too upset about. Gary Larson’s FarSide often portrayed humans and dinosaurs together, even though Larson was scientifically literate and well aware that humans and dinos never co-existed. And I don’t think we should boycott FarSide books just for something like that. The same could be said for Ice Age. Just be sure to inform children that it’s all make believe, that dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago and never encountered any mammoths or saber tooths, or humans for that matter.

  • Aj

    I think you’re being harsh on this show. Historical accuracy isn’t important to the entertainment industry. It’s troubling that this could influence public belief but as we can see with religion, many people don’t actually care what really happened. Many think that Sherlock Holmes was a real person.

    It’s great when you actually come across writers that actually have an idea about the subjects in their literature. Some shows e.g. Heroes, have writers that don’t actually care, they just use the names of things in reality as plot devices without understanding or even knowing anything about them.

  • weaves

    I can’t wait to watch this for the amusement value!

    When I first heard about it, I assumed it was a dinotopia type thing. A small amount of dinosaurs survived and Scratch accidently letting them free.

    Okay, I just love shows like this in general.

  • http://hotchurchaddiction.blogspot.com/ Jay

    Wow! I’m so thrilled to have my submission become news! Awesome!

  • Tim Bob

    JimBob- 10000 B.C. sucked ass you didnt miss anything!

    I love all the ice age movies! I’ll be seeing this one too lol. my daughter’s only four as far as her mind is concerned fairies dragons.. theyre all fair game especially if she gets o play princess and is coincidentally saved from them. once she gets a firm grasp on reality then we can go through the “true false” scenarios about movies.

  • HansBrix

    ohhhhh come on, we all know why the error was made….it’s to appeal to sarah palin and her tragically faithful followers that believe dinosaurs existed four thousand years ago, right??

    at least we can say with certainty that matt damon won’t be starring in it :P hahaha

  • Curtis

    It’s a movie for goodness sake. My kids watched the first two Ice Age movie. They read dragon and fairy stories. They know it is make believe. Kids need to exercise their imaginations as well as their minds and bodies.

    One Christmas I bought them Noah’s ark. The animals provided food for T-Rex even though this was a temporal anachronism. This year Santa is bringing gyroscopes, prisms and magnets. Santa for fun and the other presents for their love of science.

  • http://agersomnia.blogspot.com Agersomnia

    I had much more problems with King Kong’s movie, than with any Ice Age, even with the dinosaurs and sabre-toothed tigers in the same image.

    An island with enough natural resources for not one, but at least three gargantuan top predators (a carnivorous gorilla, and two tyrannosaurs’ cousins)?
    Enough green plants for not just a few, but several herds of brontosaurus-like animals?
    Gigant gorillas that are given blood sacrifices and ate them, being herbivores?

    Seriously, Kong’s a fiction movie, and Ice Age are more like cartoons. And neither is scientifically correct, but both are very entertaining.

  • http://mylongapostasy.blogspot.com ATL-Apostate

    Most folks who go see this movie won’t even get the contradiction.

  • skyotter

    Wikipedia is your friend: Ice Age 3 is about an anomolous group of dinosaurs that survived The Extinction. they were frozen in ice like Godzilla or something

    it’s NOT trying to put the Age of Dinosaurs after the Age of Mammals

  • Awesomesauce

    I just want to now why the T-rex thing is so f-ing large! The same goes for that acorn that Scratch is holding.

  • Pseudonym

    I thought the poster was weird, too, but I feel better about this after reading skyotter’s post.

    One of the things I loved about the original Ice Age is that they were very careful about the science (unless it got in the way of the story). Something I found particularly amusing is that of all the species depicted in the movie, only one survived to modern times: the dodo.

  • http://www.lugaluda.com Lugaluda

    I enjoyed watching part 1 and part 2 of Ice Age. Now I am excited for Ice age 3.

    Ice Age 3 : Dawn of the dinosaurs

  • http://www.dauntlessstudios.com Bill

    Like Picasso’s Guernica, film can transcend reality and provide us impetus for introspection or the desire to learn about the world around us. It’s a kids’ film, so the expectation is that it will be fantastical. Another expectation can be that it will spur young minds to get off of the couch and into the yard, with spade and brush in hand, to dig for fossils. Maybe they’ll find that fabled transitional form that would, once and for all, prove that Darwin’s theory really CAN violate the laws of thermodynamics and probability.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X