RE: Armadillos at the K/T!

[philidor11@snet.net]

Ken, you ask if the bolide hypothesis isn't broken, why try to 
fix it?
I agree with you that a bolide is obviously the primary cause. 
 But when you look at how widespread and thorough the extinctions 
were, all around the globe, can you be confident that a single 
event with effects lasting for a comparatively brief time must 
have produced them all?
That seems an assertion which requires proof more than the idea 
that there was one primary cause and also a number of secondary 
causes.  Would the secondary causes (including egg predation) 
have been sufficient?  That's more unlikely than the bolide as 
sole cause.
Because bolide-as-sole-cause cannot be falsified as compared 
to bolide-and-secondary-causes, I'd argue that bolide-as-sole-cause 
isn't a full scientific hypothesis.  Now there's a statement 
I'd appreciate your comments about!
  








>




This mail was sent using ePrompter, the premier email notification 
software.  Get your free download of ePrompter at http://www.ePrompter.com.