[meteorite-list] Meteor Impact Theory Takes a Hit

From: MexicoDoug_at_aol.com <MexicoDoug_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri Jan 21 07:08:24 2005
Message-ID: <1aa.2fd48b1f.2f224a9a_at_aol.com>

What was the Cretaceous-ending event that "wiped out the dinos 65 million
years ago? It is doubtful it was a single giant meteorite blast in Mexico.
Evidence also points to the Chicxulub impact being part of a multiple impact
part of history, and also that it was well over a quarter of a million years
BEFORE the end of the Cretaceous period. That paints a very different puzzle
than a massive earth scalding. One must be very careful about jumping on the
bandwagon and not keeping ideas in perspective. Scientists, great
scientists, not unlike listmembers tend to fall in love with their own theories after
being subjected to fame (press recognition for nice work), fortune (grants,
grad students, publications, etc.). Because a great theorist who backpeddles
loses a great deal of face. The Permian case has always been far more tenuous.
 
For example, most certainly the meteorite impacts at the time of Chicxulub
had a lot to do with the ending of the Cretaceous period, (but...), the
difficulty and absense of finding graveyards of scorched or sufficated dinosaurs
still relegates this to the brilliant theory department.
 
I am to believe everything I read, then the sexy Single Impact Era Ending
Event theory proponents usually mention Chixulub translates to the "Tail of the
Devil" or something similar, perhaps in some Judeochristian sense, or some
similar absurdity, the point being how things are interpreted has a lot to do
with who is doing the interpreting. I don't believe Chicxulub means that,
yet it is all over becausae so and so said it, and it is a good point to me to
realize the importance of separating a good theory from a good proof. So
while I am a strong proponent of the meteorite shaking up the equilibrium NEAR
the end of the Cretaceous, the open mind is important, not to just become a
yes person for suggestive theories and group think. For example I do believe
in the tektite origin theory which has tektites as terrestrial impact
products. I think that is a much more advanced theory and more convincing. But
there are still some doubts that have been pointed out in the past from other
listmembers and authors, so its nice to be on alert to see how this will
eventually shake out and see perhaps what additional factor not contemplated may
need to be incorporated into the theory.
 
If you like doing jigsaw puzzles, you probably can relate to that one piece
that seems to fit so well before the puzzle is completely finished. Only to
find after pondering too long, that the piece in fact doesn't go there, and
in a flash you see it goes upside down somewhere else, and suddenly all the
other pieces fall right into place without further efforts.
 
Saludos, Doug
 
 
En un mensaje con fecha 01/20/2005 9:23:57 PM Mexico Standard Time,
kelly_at_bhil.com escribe:

>I remember the more than 10 years it took to swing opinion on the
>Cretacious-ending event. We had all the same "but, but, but"
>proposals. We were told that the number of species of dinosaurs
>had been declining for millions of years --- they were going to die
>off anyway and that big rock was just a coincidence!
 
Received on Fri 21 Jan 2005 07:07:54 AM PST