Re: "Meteor theory gets rocky ride from dinosaur expert"

[Phil Bigelow <bigelowp@juno.com>]

> Here is the Abstract of Keller?s paper:

>Above the 
> `event 
> beds' latest Maastrichtian claystone sedimentation continues up to 
> the K-T 
> boundary, which is characterized by a sharp (1.4 ng/g) iridium 
> anomaly that 
> marks the K-T as a second major impact.
> The distance between the top of the `event beds' and the K-T 
> boundary 
> varies from 20 cm to 1.6 m depending on local tectonics and erosion. 


Did Keller and her crew consider the following sedimentation scenario:

1) Chicxulub impact causes tsunami that effects the Texas Maastrictian
seafloor seds. (causing hummocky crossbedding and massive seafloor
erosion).

2) During, or shortly after #1 occurred, deposition of the coarsest
spherules (proximal ejecta) occurred.

3) Many hours after #2 occurred, the returning sea water that was pushed
away by the impact explosion returns, carrying Cretaceous seafloor mud
that was eroded by flowing seawater.  This old Cretaceous mud gets
redeposited over #1 and #2.

4) Weeks to months, later, settle-out of air-fall iridium dust on top of
#1, #2, and #3 occurred.

5) Beginning of Paleogene sedimentation.

Keller et al. interpret the existence of Cretaceous seds over the "impact
event" to represent continuation of another 300,000 years of primary
Cretaceous sedimentation after the impact.  *I* interpret the same
stratigraphy as simply redeposited old Cretaceous mud that was part of
one impact event.

If Keller et al. can falsify my scenario above, then I will take her
whole team out for ice cream cones (One scoop, vanilla only.  I'm not
made of money).

<pb>
--