Re: "Forensic" Evidence Of Dinosaur Killer

[Stanley Friesen <sarima@ix.netcom.com>]

At 01:37 AM 12/13/97 -0600, Toby White wrote:
>
>There seems to be a substantial hole in your reasoning.  That hole is
>approximately 300 km in diameter and is located in the Yucatan.  
>
Nope.

All the 300 km hole proves is that a large meteorite impact occurred.  It
in no way proves the Doomsday scenarios built around said impact.  If the
fossil biological evidence is inconsistent with a particular scenario, then
that scenario is WRONG, even given the impact.

The Doomsday scenario in the newspaper article originally cited is WAY
beyond anything supported by the actual fossil evidence.

>The survival of some species disproves *some* impact theories.  
>However,
>there was clearly an impact, and the effects could hardly have been 
>less than spectacular.

Spectacular does not necessarily mean utterly devastating.

The statement in the newspaper article: "Had the dinosaurs still been alive
- and that is open to debate - then this impact would have killed them in
most places on the Earth." 
is most certainly excessive.  The most that can be said with any certainty
is: this impact would have killed many of them in many places on Earth.

>  The fact that it was not universally fatal is also not
>particularly surprising.  It comes down to an allocation of the 
>energy budget.  The incoming kinetic energy of the object could be 
>dissapated in a number of ways.

You are here discussing a *different* scenario than the one discussed in
the silly newspaper article.

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