[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: CORRELATIVE AND CAUSITIVE SCIENCE WHEN DEALING WITH EXTINCTION SCENARIOS
Peter Buchholz wrote:
<<They either pose a scenario which wouldn't have killed ANYTHING
because the nuclear winter or whatever would have lasted about a week
and would have just yellowed the figurative grass.
Or, they propose scenarios that would have killed everything on the
planet. Decades of freezing or baking temperatures that would have
either burnt, killed or froze every single plant, seed or spore on the
planet, not to mention phytoplankton, and the starving animals that
fed on them (and those that fed on them). Point is: everything would
Allan Edels <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
<The multiple effects that I detailed (and there are more) are related
to a sufficiently large rock (or whatever) hitting the earth.>
I'm not big on the extinction side of dino-debate, largely because I
agree with Horner's statement: "I want to know how they _lived_," but
this is actually fun.
1. The bolide hit (we can all agree on that)
2. It sent out a series of events (catastrophes, if
you will) that made a series of effects on the
3. Things died (e.g. non-avian dinosaurs,
enantiornithine birds, pterosaurs, ammonites,
This occured, in this order, we are [mostly] sure. Whether event 2
directly caused event 3 is another matter.
But look away from that. First, try complexity theory, better known
as chaos theory, made popular in Jurrasic Park (book and movie), and
the wonderful book _Chaos_ (forgot author and date).
One small action, through a series of resulting actions, causes an
action. Not the exact definition, but scratching through all these, we
come across pretty little butterflies in China who cause rain in
Seattle (not that they're not used to it, right, Pete?).
It was said, but a bolid impact does not directly need to cause the
extinction event, or even trigger it. However, the event would cause a
series of environmental and climactic changes, like the Panama Canal
killing surrounding species, or the Ice Age.
First, firestorm, earthquake, and tsunami, destroys immediate and
surrounding vicinity, say in that order of distance from Chixculub.
Earthquakes and volcanic activity at the antipode (the other side of
the earth, exactly) which, by the way, is just south of Bangladesh,
pretty empty at the time.
Then clouds of dust and related volcanic materials. Coverage of the
globe for months (longer, and phytoplankton all die out, no more to
renew world population, oceanic resource gone, dependant species
either find new food or die . . . you get the picture).
Clouds clear. The El Nino effect occurs (not the event, but the
force of warm currents of air and water affecting other parts of the
climate) and we get some pretty nice weather patterns (storms,
droughts, ice, rain, hot, cool, etc.) where there weren't any.
(Climate in the western US is still not set to previous years since El
Nino, about a month and a half behind schedule.)
Needless to say, you have phases of events that effect further and
further events until, perhaps only a few decades to millenia down the
road, all those lovable mosasaurs are dead. And your little rex, too.
They didn't have to die out at the same time, but geologically
speaking, they might as well have. I believe the climate caused the
whole thing. As affected by the bolide impact, and only those in small
body weight, or bradymetabolism, coldbloodedness, or ability to
hibernate, as well as suffer temperature extremes (hardy conifers,
too, fire or ice, they just keep on growin') and eventually, those
lovable little furballs open the closet of the Age of Mammals, though
many more animals survive, including ornithurine birds and crocodiles,
I wonder if I've got the wrong word in there, again . . . .
Jaime A. Headden
Qilong, the website, at:
All comments and criticisms are welcome!
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com