Dinosaur Extinction

Discussion in 'Biology & Genetics' started by Neutrino_Albatross, Jan 23, 2003.

  1. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    thanks for that. I wasn't looking at the dates and as one of the people who used to 'ridicule' valich I reacted rather than contemplating. It's not the first time I've jumped into a recently revived dead thread and made a pointless post. (It likely won't be the last.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    The Siljan Ring impact crater has no iridium. But the test results from the drilling projects showed the iridium from the hydrocarbons in the boreholes to be of terrestrial mantle origin. This caused me to question the reliability of K-T boundary data showing extraterrestial origin of the iridium so I asked Trippy how reliable chromium isotope signatures are. He says the evidence for their reliability is robust but he also thinks lack of C13 isotope indicates biological activity which I do not believe.

    It is likely that the expansion of the earth cut off the migration routes of the cold blooded dinosaurs and simultaneously their eggs became easy prey for mammals.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    You are a moron. you can't even see the 2 gaping flaws in your theory( and calling it a theory is a stretch).

    and secondly as it has been proven to you by people with training in science and with out the earth isn't expanding. if you feel the need to fanaticly hold on to such foolish notions please do it elsewhere.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    That cannot be considered to be a peer-reviewed scientific reference.
  8. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    How could the Earth be cooling and expanding at the same time? Oh, you seem to be banned.
  9. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    You don't need a peer reviewed scientific reference to refute a theory with the kind of gaping holes in it that yours does. You need common sense.

    First flaw: you don't give a reason to why an expanding earth would cause the problems you say it would. the only way for it to cause the problems you mentioned was if it was a rather large increase all at once that that kind of an event would leave traces which there are none.

    Second flaw: Your theory doesn't explain the extinction of other kinds of life besides dinosaurs most notably marine life of all kinds.
  10. fedr808 1100101 Valued Senior Member

    There is no terrestrial origin of Iridium it is purely extraterrestrial. The K-t boundry is special because of the fact that it contains a massively high amount of Iridium compared to other areas, this means that something huge and extraterrestrial must have had impacted the earth.
  11. Dinosaur Rational Skeptic Valued Senior Member

    LosGuy: Does your Keyboard have an Enter Key or some other Key that could make some white space every 3-6 lines?

    I did not bother to read your remarks becase it is annoying to try to read so many lines of text without a break. I wonder if others simillarly ignored your remarks.
  12. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    I know it wasn't the asteroid that killed them , it was...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    They were some of the first humans to start hunting animals into extinction!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  13. D H Some other guy Valued Senior Member

    That would be me, for one. Equally obnoxious are posts that go to the other extreme -- to wit, double spacing every line.
  14. Klituu Registered Senior Member

    Let us not forget about the 'Deccan Traps' as one of another major contributor to the demise of the dinosaurs............
  15. Hercules Rockefeller Beatings will continue until morale improves. Moderator

    Ooooh, nice! I wasn't familiar with this until now. Thanks!

  16. losguy Registered Member

    First: I did not know that this was a board that needed statements that are written for a much younger audience.
    Second: I did not know that reading was a problem or that people needed to have a break between words to rest up for the next word to read.
    Third: If that small amount of information is too much for you to understand and digest in one sitting then why are you trying to debate a subject.
    Fourth: I do not believe that an asteroid made a selective killing of the plants and creatures of the earth. I believe that extinctions are caused by a multitude of issues and not a single cause. When dealing with a minor event (i.e. stumbling while walking) the event gets complicated by all that occurred to create the event. To believe that throwing a rock at a building did more that break a window and maybe some interior damage and was the cause for the roof to fall in, the basement to flood, and the second floor collapse but does not touch the first floor is ridiculous.
  17. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Dangerous talk for a third rate poster in his second post on his first forum. There are individuals here who will disassemble you and your arguments while generating farts that are more explanatory of life than your own written efforts.
    I'll look on this warning to you as my good deed for the day. 

    Well that just tells us how ignorant you actually are.

    If you take any well written text book, any journal article, any novel (except perhaps Ulysses), any newspaper, any advertisement, you will find that the text is conveniently broken up in to segments by line breaks, etc. This matches well with the way the human brain performs the trick of reading. It is something that is well known, implicitly, even by schoolchildren in their first years of education.

    Since this structuring of a post makes it easier to read, then failure to do so is, in essence, rude. It conveys a sense that what you are saying is of such importance that the rest of us are obliged to put out the (small) additional effort required to wade through the morass of your thesis. Here is another piece of advice for you - most people can't be bothered. Most people won't appreciate what a great gift to the world your thoughts are.

    You are missing the point. Do you wish to provide maximum reasonable aid to convey your message in an effective manner, or do you just like the sound of your own keyboard?

    So we have identified one unique talent! You can generate irrelevant, inapplicable metaphors at the drop of bolide.

    Now to something of substance:

    If only. :shrug:

    Your concatenation of disparate facts with poorly established assessments of their relevance; a total absence of either an opening claim, executive summary, or conclusion; abominable grammar and abhorrent spelling; failure to include a single citation - other than a popular documentary; all these together render any effort to debate your points .....pointless.

    Perhaps you would like to try again, this time with clarity. Or maybe you will prefer to run away with your tail between your legs.
  18. losguy Registered Member

    From a third rate poster in his second post on his first forum

    I though that this was a discussion group not an English class nor a cut session. I am sorry that it take so much out of you to read anything so trivial as what I wrote but so far all I see is a whiner and would you like cheese with your whine.
    If you or anyone can dissect my view point them let them and the more the merrier. That is the only way good scientific view points are honed into viable theories. I am not afraid to let anyone pick apart my work Please do so but be careful that you can back up everything that you say because I will pick apart your view point.
    By the way if you are looking for an English Forum I could look for one for you.
  19. losguy Registered Member

    By the way this boards removes all formatting of your document...
  20. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Listen, your point of view is very difficult to disinter from the morasse of verbiage you've spewed indiscriminately onto the page. Good scientific viewpoints are conveyed by crisp, concise, focused language, presented in a clear, attractive manner. By all means disregard this convention and have yourself thought of as an ignorant boor. Your choice.

    (As to your offer of milk products, your own remarks were sufficiently cheesy, thank you.)

    I shall deal initially with this sentence from your original post:
    1. On what basis do you claim that the central debris column did not rise higher than the coronet?
    2.On what basis do you claim that a worldwide firestorm is not possible unless the central debris column reaches higher than the coronet?
    3. Who do you believe there are current claims of a world wide charcoal layer related to the impact?
    4. On what basis do you claim that extensive acid rain, worldwide is not possible unless the central debris column reaches higher than the coronet?
    5. a) Do you believe frog species survived the impact b) do you believe this was because there was not widespread acid rain c) do you believe the frogs could not have survived widespread acid rain d)why do you believe the foregoing points are relevant?

    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 26, 2008
  21. Hercules Rockefeller Beatings will continue until morale improves. Moderator

    Mod note: Okay guys, let's cool down and stay on topic with some dispassionate analysis of the facts.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Hi losguy,

    It doesn’t.

    Well, appropriate punctuation of text requires line spacing and separation of paragraphs. This makes multiple paragraphs much easier to read. Without this punctuation it is hard to read long passages of text and many will not bother, thus limiting your audience. So, if you’re trying to converse with people via text, it’s a simple courtesy to use line spacing and separation of paragraphs. You can use the ‘Preview Post’ button to check formatting before posting.

    I think you’ll find that there are many here who understand this topic and are able to converse with you on your anticipated level.

    That’s not a valid analogy. The impact of large bodies with the Earth is hardly comparable to throwing a rock at a building.
  22. losguy Registered Member

    Quite obviously you have not read the post. This post has been to several forums and discussed without any problems reading the post. First of all you tell me I am putting too much into my post then you turn around and tell me I am not putting enough in the post. So it has to be crisp and concise but has to have all the references (probably because the great flood theory is the only theory you have about the Dinosaur extinction).

    Big rock from sky did not kill Barney.
    Some other things did.
    No world wide Charcoal
    No Acid Rain
    Frogs Didn’t die.
    No sea water currents (sea conveyor)
    Possibly Methane.
    Possibly Deccan Trapps,
    Possibly Continental Drift.
    Global Warming
    Environmental change.
    More than likely all three.
    Fossil records end less than a foot below K-T boundary.
    Only certain animals died
    Only certain Plants died
    Only certain fish died.

    Now all you have to do is do a little reading to find out which Paleontologist proved what.
  23. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    So you don't wish to discuss, you merely wish to pontificate. Your post rambled. Your central thesis was obfuscated by crap formatting and absence of structure.

    I didn't say it did. But thank you for clarifying your viewpoint.


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Strawman argument. The absence of worldwide charcoal in no way invalidates the case for the Chicxulub impact as the primary agent responsible for the demise of the dinosaurs.

    Now you are clutching at strawmen. Acid rain that would have tended to follow the impact, especially since it likely vaporised a substantial gypsum body, would have settled within a decade.
    The effect upon amphibians would have been ameliorated by local conditions. Amphibians are also notable for their hibernation. This is not controlled on a seasonal basis, but by temperature. It is quite probable that the frogs, sensibly, were insensible during the worst after effects of the impact.
    In short, you have not provided evidence that there was no acid rain. Frog survival just does not buy you that, no matter what Dr. Bakker thinks.

    So geology and arithmetic are problematic for you!

    What caused the global warming? What initiated the flood basalt eruptions in India? What led to methane clathrate degradation? What evidence is there for major changes in ocean currents at this time that would have had a negative impact on life? Name even one specific thing about the changes in plate positions at that time that could have had a rapid and devastating impact on life?
    Yes. If they had all died we wouldn't be here to argue about it.
    Do you know nothing about extinction events? You do realise that there is always selectivity? Some of it is down to luck, but most of it is a combination of locale and lifestyle.

Share This Page