[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: K-T impact theory

>I think the asteroid-impact theory may be falling apart of its own
>accumulating flaws          
>Even assuming a "reservoir" of unaffected life somewhere else (one that 
>oddly included no dinosaurs?), at the *very* least we should see an 
>enormous dead zone all across the continent, and not a brief one either.

No matter how big the dead zone, "brief" is a relative thing in 
geological time.  Even if it took 100,000 years for North American 
ecosystems to recover (if you can use "recover" in terms of mass 
extinction), there's no guarantee that it would be represented in the 
fossil record.                                            

>In short, if the impact was as devastating as is claimed, then how did
>*anything* survive?

What, impact theory is out because it's *too* effective an 
explanation?  I would be the first to agree that the effects of the 
KT impact on dinosaurs and other organisms are still pretty murky.  
But as far as we can tell, an impact *did* happen at the KT boundary, 
and surely it had some effect.  If a geologist told me that a 
hypersonic firestorm roasted North America, and he had evidence to 
back it up, I'd have a hard time refuting that because (what we know 
so far of) the fossil record didn't show (our estimations of) the 
expected effects.

"I must face him -- alone."

Matt Wedel