Re: [P&C] Re: Did Earth Blow Up The Dinosaurs
- Dewey McLean wrote:
>>>Please show me even one geographical locality that has a K-T boundaryiridium-enriched clay layer for which you can state unequivocally that it
is part a single, thin, globally isochronous (same age everywhere) impact
fallout layer which was deposited within a
few-days, weeks, months, or even decades duration, that spans both
marine and terrestrial settings--and is composed purely of
impact-related materials--and we'll go from there.<<<
Am I to assume from the above that you are denying the K-T boundary event
occurred, or at least did not occur at the K-T boundary? If so, that puts
you in a very tiny minority of geologists and paleontologists.
But first let me state that I am neither a geologist nor a paleontologist.
I am simply an engineer that loves both these fields, as well as other
related fields such as biology and astronomy. Over a good part of my 65
years I have read hundreds of books on these subjects. And there is one
other field I love, logic. I love to study arguments.
I have found that everyone makes errors of logic in arguments, and I am no
exception. It is just that some make a lot more errors than others. I
believe there are a couple fundamental errors in your logic.
As far as the iridium enriched layer, I haven't seen it myself but I have
read hundreds of essays, reports and books that speak of it. An example:
"The boundary is marked in the geologic record by a thin layer enriched in
the platinum-group element iridium. Iridium attaches itself to iron, so
nearly all Earth's store of it sank along with the iron to the core early
in the planet's history. Normal iridium concentrations in the crust are
tens of parts per trillion; at the K-T boundary, they've been found at
3,000 parts per trillion."
I could give you hundreds of such quotes as the above. However if you
choose to deny it, then there is nothing more to say. But the evidence of
an impact and an associated fallout is absolutely overwhelming.
"The most widely-accepted estimate of the energy released in the impact is
roughly 75 million megatons to 100 million megatons. In contrast, the
energy released in the Meteor Crater impact in Arizona was only about 10
megatons. Radiometric dating methods (40Ar-39Ar) show that the melted rock
at the bottom of the Chicxulub crater is 65.07 +/- 0.1 million years old
(Swisher et al., 1992). This date is extremely close to two separate age
estimates for the K-T boundary in the North American interior (65.00+/-
0.04 Ma; Gradstein et al. (1995:102)) (65.4 +/- 0.1 Ma; Obradovich
And of course the K_T Boundary layer is different in different places of
the world. Where the boundary is exposed in North America, because of its
nearness to the impact, it is much thicker. Where the boundary is exposed
in the Old World, the layer is much thinner of course.
You wrote in your earlier post:
>>>More recently, Kevin Pope's paper "Impact dust not the cause of theCretaceous-Tertiary mass extinction" (Geology, 2002, v. 30, pp.
99-102), seems to support my research that found no dust-induced
Strange that you should cite Pope as supporting your theory. While it is
true that Pope does not believe that the impact winter was dust induced,
he still believes that an "impact winter" WAS induced. And your theory
implies also that impact related fires had nothing to do with the
>>>That paper also addressed K-T global wildfires that were claimed tohave destroyed earth's forests via sparks from an impact event. I saw
no definitive evidences of any K-T boundary global wildfires.<<<
Yet unlike you, Pope believes that global fires WERE a significant factor:
"To truly understand the influence of impact dust, scientists need to find
a way to directly measure the amount of small dust particles in such
places as the K-T boundary. In the meantime, Pope studied patterns of
coarse dust particles to create a model that showed how the small dust
particles were dispersed. Incorporating these geological observations with
new theoretical work, Pope asserts that very few of the particles are of
the size that it would take to shut down photosynthesis for any
significant length of time and therefore the original K-T impact
extinction hypothesis is not valid. He believes it may have been sulfate
aerosols produced from impacted rocks and soot from global fires that
could have shut down photosynthesis and caused global cooling."
However my main gripe with your last post was you simply chose to ignore
that I asked for an explanation for the soot in the K-T layer, but instead
implied that such a widespread layer did not exist. If that is your
opinion then you should state flat out that you do not believe that such
an iridium, soot, and tektite enriched layer exist. Also when I asked for
an explanation of the fern spike, that got the same treatment. Perhaps you
deny the existence of any fern spike as well.
I found the entire nature of your post rather condescending. Prove to me,
you seem to be saying, that such a layer was ever laid down within a few
weeks or even decades and we will go from there.
Well hell, that is an impossible request and you very well know it. How
can I, or anyone for that matter, prove exactly how long it took to lay
down such a layer? That is a red herring. A red herring is drug across the
dog's trail to divert the scent from the true prey, or in your case, the
real argument. If I cannot prove that the layer was laid down in a given
length of time, then your argument that there were no wildfires or "impact
winter" wins by default.
I really don't think so.
The impact winter caused by the combination of sulfate aerosols, soot
(smoke) AND dust likely did not cause the extinction.
Wildfires likely did not cause the extinction.
Destruction of habitat likely did not cause the extinction.
Poisoning of the atmosphere by dust, soot and aerosols likely did not
cause the extinction.
The upsetting of the carbon cycle likely did not cause the extinction.
Violent changes in weather patterns likely did not cause the extinction.
The spread of disease caused by animals unaccustomed to eating carrion,
eating the decaying bodies of animals likely did not cause the extinction.
Massive pollution of all fresh water streams, lakes and rivers likely did
not cause the extinction.
But ALL these things were caused by the impact and ALL these things
COMBINED, DID VERY LIKELY cause the extinction.
However from the very condescending nature of your last post, it is very
probable that you will once again ignore all my points in favor of some
red herring. (Prove this then we'll talk you unprofessional small fry.)
After all, I am NOT a professional geologist nor paleontologist, therefore
what the hell do I know.
- It is the true believer's ability to "shut his eyes and stop his ears"
to the facts that do not deserve to be either seen or heard which
is the source of his unequaled fortitude and constancy. He cannot
be frightened by danger nor disheartened by obstacle nor baffled
by contradictions because he denies their existence.
Eric Hoffer: The True Believer.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
- Dear Ron and Fred:
Please tone it down. Please disagree without being disagreeable.
>>>>Your version doesn't wash. Not even close.<<<
>Freddy, for the umpteenth time, it is not MY version, it is the
>standard accepted version, accepted by at least 90 percent of
>geologists and paleontologists.
>>>>You have already acknowledged that the evidence is of a 10%
>burn off of all vegetation.<<<
>Like hell, when did I acknowledge that? We do not know exactly
>what percent of the vegetation burned but even a 10% burn off
>could have easily dumped enough soot into the atmosphere to
>account for the soot in the KT boundary layer. And it could also
>account for enough soot, along with the debris thrown up by the
>impact, to cause an impact winter.
>>>>If we see several regional impact residue and burn residue
>it is because there were several impacts not your fairy tale
>Wow! MY fairy tale chicxulub event. Talk about hutzpah, that one
>takes the cake. The event was a fairy tale, it never happened!
>No impact, no impact crater, no iridium, no shocked quartz, no
>tektites, soot and no chromium impact layer. It simply never
>Freddy, there might have been several much smaller impacts. It
>might have been a small comet, or part of a larger comet that
>broke up. Or an asteroid with several much smaller satellites.
>(Asteroids often have very small satellites.) But it was the 10
>kilometer diameter giant that slammed into the area of Chicxulub
>that did the damage. At least that is what the mountains of
>The evidence that a 10 kilometer wide meteorite DID strike
>Chicxulub is absolutely overwhelming. And there is no doubt that
>this would be large enough to cause the ensuing global impact
>And this is dramatic. The foraminifera from 2 cm below the K/T
>ejecta and tektite layer, then the foraminifera 1 cm above it.
>And you call the Chicxulb impact a fairy tale? Again, what
>hutzpah. What type of person would deny an event where such
>overwhelming evidence exist? Why a Freddy type of person of
>Here is another link connecting the fern spike with the iridium
>layer. You will notice that the fern spike starts at the EXACT
>same time as the iridium anomaly but outlasts it by several
>centimeters of sediment. The abundance of fern spores goes from
>about 40% before the iridium anomaly to over 95% afterward.
>- We, alone on earth, can rebel against the tyranny of the selfish
>replicators......There is no inconsistency in favoring Darwinism as
>an academic scientist while opposing it as a human being; any
>more than there is inconsistency in explaining cancer as an
>academic doctor while fighting it as a practicing one.
> Richard Dawkins, A Devil's Chaplain
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online.
>THE WORLD IS IN CRISIS DUE TO GLOBAL WARMING!
>Conservation-aimed "financial incentives" at:
>Link to climate articles and climate data summaries
>DON'T MISS OPPORTUNITIES TO TELL OTHERS
>TO JOIN : Paleontology_and_Climate [P&C]
>... and ... ClimateArchive [C/A] ... PLEASE
>Yahoo! Groups Links