[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Trying to falsify the bolide
John Bois ,( and others), would like to see this extinction thread end. I
was growing tired of it myself, after finding that I`m just repeating
myself. However, the scenario he offers as a closing statement (as authored
by "Chris and Toby") seems to just open up many more questions and
possibilities for argument.From what I can follow of it, it seems to depend
largely on an extensive "nuclear winter" effect. I personally believe the
very basic cause of the extinctions is the blocking of
photosynthesis...period! I take the impact as given, and the types of
species that went extinct as given, then find the scenario that best
explains the facts. Nuclear winter, Acid rain, and all the other effects, if
they occurred, were trivial (in degree). They don`t explain the facts, they
only complicate the matter. As they don`t seem to fit, I just ignore them. I
could just leave it at that,...but there are parts of Chris and Toby`s, and
I suppose John`s argument that just don`t sit right with me. Here are a few
"This defoliation....would have much more serious effects on bird
populations--many of today`s species...depend on it for predation
I`m not so sure of that,..I would think that the lack of foliation would
prevent an ambush from predators. If the birds could more readily see the
attacker, they could then just fly away.
" Without cover, mammals would be at the mercy of larger predators."
By these larger predators, I assume you mean theropods? Didn`t they hunt by
day, and the mammals only come out at night?
" No one is suggesting , I think, that with all the fruit, leaves, and prey
gone there will now be a bumper crop of insects so that all can get by."
No, not all, just the insectivores.
The rest of the argument seems to go into some sort of an extended winter,
which I mentioned I don`t believe in, as it dosen`t seem to fit the facts.
Will the discussion end on this note??