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

RE: youngest dino-remains



At 06:38 PM 3/17/99 -0500, Derkits, Gustav E, JR (Gus) wrote:
>This controversy has been argued at length since the Alvarez papers. 
>1. The K-T boundary is not defined at a resolution of 1000 years.
>2. Disarticulated bones are more likely to be the result of secondary
>deposition than articulated sets. I.e. animal dies, is buried, 
>million years pass, river cuts through stratum containing fossils, 
>redepositing them in a stratum with a later date.

To be pedantic, any time after burial, from mere months to millions of
years later, a fossil may be eroded out by a river.  This is *especially*
common in dinosaur bearing sediments, as most such are river sediments to
begin with.

>Since the DEFINITIVE proofs that birds are dinosaurs
>offered by the recent finds in China, the question of what
>caused the extinction of the dinosaurs has been rendered
>silly

Not at all.  The extinction was still one of Big Five, and outside of the
avian clade, it wiped out all dinosaurs.  A causal explanation for this is
indeed very interesting, even *with* the survival of *one* clade of dinosaurs.


As to the post-Cretaceous teeth, there are numerous such above the Hell
Creek in Montana, mostly theropod and ceratopsian. (Which is as expected
for redeposited teeth).

--------------
May the peace of God be with you.         sarima@ix.netcom.com