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

Impact only a part of it all....

Not to rehash a subject that, I am sure, has been debated to death, but
I am curious about one thing.

Why does everyone (meaning the public, of course, but also the people
who tend to support this theory) believe that the KT impact was the sole
cause of Dinosaur extinction?  The impact occured, that cannot be
denied.  We have the iridium layer, tectites, shocked quartz, and of
course, the dated crater ittself.  That it caused dinosaur death can't
be debated.  When something six miles in diameter hits our planet,
things are gonna die.

But isn't there evidence that most dinosaurs were already on their way
our millions of years before the impact?  If so, couldn't the impact
simply have helped along the mass extinction, what with all of its
effects on the climate, rather than being THE reason for the extinction?

Do we have evidence of other mass extinctions that date to the time of
other massive impact scars on the Earth?  If not, then that might
support only partial effects on global life....

Just to let you all know, I'm not posting this to make any pioints, or
to start any arguments.  I simply would like opinions as to why this is
thought.  I know that the press plays a large part in it all.  They see
a story on the impact rtelating to the dinosaurs' death, and of course
it gets portrayed as the only cause...but what about the professionals? 
What do you guys think?  Taking into account that the impact did indeed
happen (and as far as I know, this is not contested), was the asteroid
or comet solely responsible, or was it a kind of capstone on a long and
drawn out extinction?

(side note:  if this HAS been rehashed to death already, don't bother

Best regards....
John M. Dollan
Montana State University-Northern
Graduate Assistant
ICQ# 308260

"To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the
universe...."  Carl Sagan