Board Thread:Writer's Workshop/@comment-27818372-20160220063944/@comment-26425680-20160220104851

Here's the thing about theory pastas, they have to reasonably make sense in order to work. In other words, you have to explain a phenomenon in a way that accounts for all the known facts in the most natural way possible. You want your reader to think to themselves, "I never thought of it that way, but it totally works!" Unfortunately, what you've given us can best be described as stoner thoughts. Your explanations don't feel natural or realistic at all (e.g. The scientists thought it would be cute to have a little pet dinosaur around). Since the goal is to try your best to convince your readers that your theory might be true, the more you veer from reality in your explanations, the harder it becomes to reach your goal. Obviously there comes a point when you need to introduce some fantastical elements into your pasta, but in this case, it's too much, too fast. In the end it's just not scary. I think your core idea (a docile animal developed by scientists reverting back to its meat-eating form) is workable, but this attempt falls somewhat flat.