[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Dinosaur extinction
In article <Pine.OSF.3.95q.980221193721.31255Aemail@example.com>,
John Bois <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes
>On Sat, 21 Feb 1998, Richard Keatinge wrote:
>> No. Try reading "The Beak of the Finch" sometime, after the "Origin of
>> Species". Natural selection was supported by rather little evidence in
>> Darwin's time - it was an ingenious speculation. But it was testable
>> and has been tested.
>This was the point I was trying to make!
>But with regard to testability it might be unreasonable to require
>experimental proof for paleontological hypotheses. Weight of evidence
>might have to be enough. With extinction, though, there is nothing
>beyond: Now you see 'em. Now you don't.
And iridium layers, and the things you don't see (like, a really
satisfying unifying hypothesis for the K-T should include a reason for
dead dinos on widely-separated continents and for dead non-dinos on
continental shelves). Your point about the experimental testability is
a good one, though. I'd like to rerun the Cretaceous but can't.