Marshall's November Science paper

[Joe Daniel <jdaniel@aristotle.net>]

I just got hold of Nov. 22 Science (ok, I'm way behind in my reading) 
and read the paper by Marshall and somebody (sorry somebody) about their 
statistical study of ammonite(?) extinctions in the Maastrictian.  Their 
paper clearly stated that their data supported both a gradual extinction 
series and an abrupt extinction event.  However, in the early notes 
section where Richard Kerr did a layman's review of their research, it 
was heavily slanted toward abrupt extinctions.  I can say this because 
the title Kerr chose for his bit stated flat out that they supported 
sudden extinction over that of a gradual series.  This slant to the 
article bothered me considerably.  Anybody got any ideas why they would 
choose to bias their article that way (they as in the Science people, I 
have no idea what Marshall and the other guy thought about it).

Joe Daniel