[timun]

Originally Posted by Locke

I dont think Dinosaurs can live in cold environments?

No one really knows, but there are hypotheses that at least some of them were "warm-blooded".

This is all kind of moot anyway, in that in the only clever plot point the Jurassic World sequels have had—one of the arguments Ian Malcolm made in the book "The Lost World"—is that these are not dinosaurs: they're genetically-engineered theme park attractions.

Spoiler!

Malcolm had a couple long, drawn-out arguments in the novel with Richard Levine (a character obviously never translated to any screen adaptation) about this. Levine (a paleontologist who hypothesized that dinosaurs went extinct at least in part because of behavioural changes or a lack thereof) considered "the Lost World" of "Site B" to be a unique opportunity to study dinosaurs in a natural habitat but Malcolm argued it's BS, as their behaviours are not going to be the same as a "real" dinosaur's behaviours: they're not actually dinosaurs, and they're not in a natural habitat. They observe a lot of behaviours that don't make any sense, such as the velociraptors being absolutely rapacious predators that prey on their own young. They don't give a definitively explanation for this, but Malcolm supports his hypothesis that these animals could never be studied in a natural setting by noting that the population is massively imbalanced: there are too many predator animals, and too few prey. The population would eventually be self-extinguishing anyway.

(That, plus the fact the population was infected with a prion disease called "DX", a kind of spongiform encephalopathy like scrapie...)