Re: Extinction

[John Bois <jbois@umd5.umd.edu>]

On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 Dinogeorge@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 3/23/00 6:52:19 AM EST, jbois@umd5.umd.edu writes:
> 
> << I'd rather not bring evidence into this discussion.  >>
> 
> Surely you're joking.

Yes, partly a self-deprecatory remark; partly a jab at you for excluding
certain strains of evidence.  For example, the lack of reconvergence to
very large body size in egg layers during the Cenozoic is a very
interesting fact; and it may have a bearing on the patterns of survival
and extinction at the K/T.  But you are not willing to even discuss this
because you already know what happened.

Also, (and I think this will demonstrate your circular thinking), you are
not curious about the passage of birds through the K/T.  Neornithines make
it through, not because they are special at all, but because they are
fluke survivors of a holocaust.  How do you know that?  Because you know
the dinosaurs were killed in the same holocaust.  _But_ you are unwilling
to consider the alternate hypothesis, viz, neornithines outcompeted
enantiornithines.  As far as I can tell, this conclusion is made without
much reference to bird evidence.  And yet, there is a very active debate
about this very subject going on right now among people who really know
what they're talking about.

So it is this gag rule I am protesting, a style of argument which
prohibits certain kinds of evidence--or certain hypotheses, because they
challenge your own ideas.