Această carte este minunată! Textele detaliate mi-au oferit multe informații noi și interesante. Ilustrațiile în stil vechi mi-au oferit un sentiment de nostalgie, deoarece îmi aminteau de cărțile din vremea când eram mic și de-abia descopeream fascinanta lume a dinozaurilor.
Recomand această carte cu tot dragul!

A bit of an old book, but still I learned a lot about dino’s

The Kingfisher Illustrated Dinosaur Encyclopedia (Hardcover)
by David Burnie
This book has great information about dinosaurs, with amazing drawings.

Tikrai išsami ir įdomi enciklopedija. Man labai patiko.

Not nearly as good as they say ( www.amazon.com/review/R18YGR52KZVM9N/... ): 2/5

Short version: If you want the best encyclopedic dino book for casual readers, get Holtz's "Dinosaurs". Despite the other Amazon Reviews, Burnie's "The Kingfisher Illustrated Dinosaur Encyclopedia" (henceforth Kingfisher) was never the best or even just decent in its own right.

Long version: Read on.

As you may have noticed, I usually review non-fiction dino books that either don't get enough praise for being good or don't get enough criticism for being bad. What's interesting about Kingfisher is that it got praised for things that other books got criticized for. There's a lot I could criticize about Kingfisher.* However, for the purposes of this review, I'll focus on the 3 major things that it got praised for.

1) The other Amazon Reviewers praised Kingfisher for the seemingly-chronological order (E.g. Kingfisher "is arranged in a chronological order giving copious attention to dinosaur habits and habitats"). In actuality, as indicated by the table of contents, the dino-related chapters are arranged in no particular order.**

2) The other Amazon Reviewers praised Kingfisher for the seemingly-up-to-date info (E.g. "I found this book to be up-to-date on a lot of information and is and outstanding guide to dinosaur life and times"). In actuality, there's an average of at least 1 factual error per page in Kingfisher, a 224 page book. See SpongeBobFossilPants' "Things I Learnt From A 2001 Encyclopedia: Redux" for all the dino-related examples: https://web.archive.org/web/201702251...

3) The other Amazon Reviewers praised Kingfisher for the seemingly-accurate illustrations (E.g. "All the illustrations are accurate unlike "Dinosaurus" by Parker and Gee's "A Field Guide to Dinosaurs". Only Raul Martin's illustrations in "National Geographic Dinosaur" are of equal quality"). In actuality, those by Sibbick are outdated to varying degrees, while those by various illustrators are shameless rip-offs of more famous illustrations (E.g. All the dinos on pages 98-99 are shameless rip-offs of Sibbick's "Normanpedia" dinos), just plain abominable (E.g. See the cover, which looks more like an "American Godzilla Puppet" than any known dino), or some combination of both (E.g. The Barosaurus on pages 80-81 is both a shameless rip-off of Sibbick's Ultrasauros on pages 82-83 & a "freaky giraffoid").***

*I'm specifically referring to the facts that 1) less than half of this so-called "Dinosaur Encyclopedia" (I.e. 98 pages out of 224) is about dinos proper, & 2) it's claimed that it's "undoubtedly the most authoritative[...]guide to the world of these amazing creatures" on the 1st inside flap despite the fact that Burnie is neither an expert nor, in this case, a collaborator with experts.

**In reference to the table of contents:
Life in the distant past
The age of ancient life
The age of reptiles
Plant-eating giants
Ornithopods
The meat eaters
Giant meat eaters
Armoured dinosaurs
Reptiles in the air
Reptiles in the sea
The age of mammals.

***Google "Vintage Dinosaur Art: The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Dinosaurs" & "The freaky giraffoid Barosaurus meme" for "Normanpedia" & "freaky giraffoid", respectively.

Best of all the dinosaur encyclopedias. It truly is concise in size and density, with lots of great information and photos in one convenient hardcover.