[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

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