Chicxulub answer to wrong question! - sci.bio.paleontology #2637 (fwd)

[sean.kerns@sdrc.com (sean kerns)]

Just thought I would forward this over for general interest,
becuase I know this had been discussed at great length
here, and it's a different take.

Any comments?

Sean

Forwarded message:
> In article <46855i$35q@news.iadfw.net>, haydenc@iadfw.net (Hayden Chasteen) 
> writes:
> |> Finally, those of us who have long questioned the Chicxulub structures
> |> importance in dinosaur extinction, have support.  In the October issue
> |> of Geology, The article: Yucatan subsurface stratigraphy: implications
> |> and constraints for the Chicxulub Impact, By Ward, Keller, Stinnesbeck
> |> and Adatte gives really credence to our assertion that this structure
> |> has no importance.  It is simply the wrong answer to the Dinosaur
> |> extinction problem.  Main points in article.
> |>    1) Structure is too small - appears that Cretaceous stratigraphy is
> |> only disturbed out to a distance of 100 km.
> |>    2) "Impact ejecta" is overlain by as much as 18m of Late Cretaceous
> |> (Maastrichtian) sediments.  In short, it is old to be the lauded K/T
> |> boundary event.
> |> While there are many points the the article that bear discussion I
> |> think that these two should start some interesting interations             
> |> 
> 


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
*  Snake---------                                          *
*  sean.kerns@sdrc.com                                     *
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-