if there were any local conditions that might have caused animals to assemble in a small area. Similar caveats are aired in the Dino Gangs book and documentary, but, while I must credit the media masterminds behind the package for including dissenting voices, the arguments of the sceptical scientists are not taken seriously. Both the book and documentary record the search for evidence in support of Currie's hypothesis, and details are often spun in Currie's favor even when the evidence is contradictory or ambiguous. In Dino Gangs the book, which reads like a bland transcript of the documentary, Currie visits animal locomotion specialist John Hutchinson at the Royal Veterinary College in Hatfield, England. Hutchinson explains that young tyrannosaurs were probably more agile and "bouncy" than adults, but whether they could truly run faster -- acting as fleet-footed scouts as Currie suspects -- is not clear. Yet the rest of the book considers Hutchinson's findings as a confirmation that Currie was correct. Details of Tarbosaurus brain anatomy are spun in a similar way. Lawrence Witmer , an expert on dinosaur brains and soft-tissue anatomy at Ohio University, explains that there's no definite indicator of pack-hunting behaviour in the brain of Tarbosaurus -- there is no "social lobe" to look at -- only to have the book's author write "Currie prefers to reverse the line of enquiry: to ask whether there's anything in the brain to say that tyrannosaurs could not have complex social behavior." The answer is no. Pack hunting remains