re: the deccan traps and the bolide

[binder@zk3.dec.com (vitam gustare)]

Neil Clark writes:

>> But [the Deccan plateau is] not anywhere near the antipodes...
>> ...relative to Chicxulub.
>
> Perhaps it was at the time.  Someone can look into that if they have 
> enough time?

If we accept the theories that posit drift from Pangaea through the
Laurasia/Gondwanaland phase to the present, we find that the area
that's now Yucatan is much closer to the Deccan plateau.  Global maps
I've seen that represent the Cretaceous show a smaller Atlantic and a
larger Pacific than we now have; the implication from this is that the
modern position of what was then the andipodal piece of crust is
probably in eastern Australia, now even farther from the plateau than
the present antipodes point.

Again, I'm not a geologist, or even a physicist; but I get an idea once
in a while, and when I do, look out!  :-)

-dick

||| Omnes hic mentes mihi sunt, non Collegio Armorum Digitalum. |||