extinction events

[zenlizard@juno.com (Sam j hogan)]

     OK, here's a new thread on this subject.  We've  (almost)  all been
talking as if there is a direct causal correlation between the K-T
extinction event and the species that were NOT wiped out.  That is,
somewhere  (people seem to differ about whether we have found it or not),
there is a coherent explanation about WHY the species that survived did
so, even if that explanation differes from species to species...
     Now, a  (new?)   tack.  Have there been any studies done on the
possibility that species which survived did so because of simple random
distribution?  Even proof by induction  (that is, you assume a non-causal
survival and thatn DISPROVE it, thereby forcing a causal explanation,
which may or may not be discovered yet)?
     Two problems: 1)   proof by induction works in the artificially
constructed mathematical world, but seldom in the natural scientific
world;  there simply  are too many alternative proofs for  "disproved"
ideas.  2)  Most people are unwilling to accept non-causal events in the
macro world because it goes against the  grain of scientific methodology,
orthodoxy,--non-causal macro world events are scientifically icky.
     Just throwing some chaos into the order,
     zenlizard 
As you travel through life, don't forget to stop and eat the insects.