Although any T. Rex–enthralled kid will tell you that a gigantic asteroid wiped the dinosaurs off the planet, scientists have always regarded this impact theory as a hypothesis subject to revision based on further evidence gathered from around the globe. Other possible causes, such as volcanism and smaller, multiple asteroid strikes, never actually went away, and over the years researchers raised important points that did not fully jibe with a history-changing celestial impact near the Yucatan peninsula one awful day some 65.5 million years ago.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=asteroid-killed-dinosaurs
The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (57% of Full)
Re: A Theory Set in Stone: An Asteroid Killed the Dinosaurs, After All
All posts are those of the individual authors and the owner
of this site does not endorse them. Content should be considered opinion
and not fact until verified independently.
March 05, 2010 02:52PM |
March 05, 2010 05:05PM |
March 05, 2010 05:09PM |
March 05, 2010 05:11PM |
March 05, 2010 05:26PM |
March 05, 2010 05:34PM |
Quote
Frank Furter
I don't remember it happening that way.
Actually it's because you were in your dotage already.
Old Dude
March 05, 2010 05:45PM |
A few dinosaurs survived:
March 05, 2010 06:59PM |
March 05, 2010 07:26PM |
March 05, 2010 08:23PM |
March 05, 2010 07:35PM |
March 05, 2010 07:57PM |
|
Re: A Theory Set in Stone: An Asteroid Killed the Dinosaurs, After All March 06, 2010 06:00AM |
I have also explored some of the claims made within the impact and exit event - especially the potential for shockwaves passing through earth. IMO the geography of earth appears to indicate that a 'force' of some kind did propogate across the northern hemisphere towards the himalayas. I have just spent a bit of time putting some images on photobucket: http://s829.photobucket.com/albums/zz214/finchcliff/
If you click on an image you'll see my thoughts below each one - for whatever they are worth!! LOL
Cheers, Finchy
If you click on an image you'll see my thoughts below each one - for whatever they are worth!! LOL
Cheers, Finchy
March 06, 2010 08:30AM |
March 05, 2010 08:29PM |
March 06, 2010 07:27AM |
|
Re: A Theory Set in Stone: An Asteroid Killed the Dinosaurs, After All March 14, 2010 05:52PM |
Quote
Dave
...The meteor could not have come out near the Himalayas since they did not exist at that time. It is not possible for a meteor to travel through the Earth as that author claimed....
I have also read the impact and exit event theory and have to say that it is a fascinating read. A couple of comments... the theory asks the reader to put the entire event into the 'context of an impact and exit event'. I did this and even though it was sometimes difficult (because of what I have been taught about plate tectonics etc) the overall effect was to make me question some of my learning. I have tried being objective and relate what I have read with what we know, but the fact remains that the content of the hypothesis and the way the context pulls together much of the geology of earth is, well difficult for me to ignore. For example whenever I look at the himalayas I cannot see anything else but a huge 'hole' in the earth where the takla makan desert is situated. Add to this the observations made that the geology of the surrounding region also appears to resemble huge flows of 'ejected magma'. Has anyone any comment on the authors claims about the similarities between the coastlines of many islands and continents and how they relate to the hypothesis? I'd be interested to hear them. Finchy, the pics on the photobucket link you posted earlier might help those who haven't read the book.
March 15, 2010 09:26AM |
The hypothesis may seem to pull together some geology, but it completely ignores the physics. A bolide around 6 miles across is not going to tunnel through anything and come out the other side intact. It just doesn't work that way. Like I said earlier, take this guys book and put it on the shelf right next to Velikovsky and von Däniken.Quote
Lal
I have also read the impact and exit event theory and have to say that it is a fascinating read. A couple of comments... the theory asks the reader to put the entire event into the 'context of an impact and exit event'. I did this and even though it was sometimes difficult (because of what I have been taught about plate tectonics etc) the overall effect was to make me question some of my learning. I have tried being objective and relate what I have read with what we know, but the fact remains that the content of the hypothesis and the way the context pulls together much of the geology of earth is, well difficult for me to ignore. For example whenever I look at the himalayas I cannot see anything else but a huge 'hole' in the earth where the takla makan desert is situated. Add to this the observations made that the geology of the surrounding region also appears to resemble huge flows of 'ejected magma'. Has anyone any comment on the authors claims about the similarities between the coastlines of many islands and continents and how they relate to the hypothesis? I'd be interested to hear them. Finchy, the pics on the photobucket link you posted earlier might help those who haven't read the book.
March 28, 2010 02:54PM |
March 28, 2010 04:13PM |
March 29, 2010 04:11PM |
March 29, 2010 05:18PM |
March 29, 2010 05:36PM |
March 29, 2010 05:42PM |
March 29, 2010 05:31PM |
March 29, 2010 05:40PM |
March 30, 2010 04:46PM |
Quote
Lal
Dave, Finchy, mrcondron and all - this whole impact and exit event discussion is being skewed because although I find all the comments interesting it appears that it is taking place in the wrong place! The impact and exit event website suggests that this particular impact may have killed off the dinosaurs, but the author writes in the book that he has no idea when the apparent impact/exit event took place and makes no mention of the extinction of the dinosaurs. I suspect that this is because a lot of his research centres around the gulf of mexico - and maybe he got a little excited when putting his website together (as Finchy says it is his first attempt at selling a book, after all).
He should have spend a bit more time actually reading up on the crater, and geology. The dating techniques used by real scientists dates the Chix crater at about 36 million years ago. That's the same time given to a layer of iridium found around the world. Below that layer; lots of dinosaurs. Above that layer; none. And that iridium layer, well.... THAT is the meteor! It vaporized upon impact.
Quote
As we all know, this is also the area where the chixculub crater was discovered. I quickly came to the conclusion (rightly or wrongly) that an impact and exit event could have occured and might have caused earth to almost split apart.
There was no "impact and exit event." At best the correct term to use is "fanciful impact and exit conjecture."
Quote
If Dave is correct and 6 mile wide rocks don't go flying through rocky planets then Finchy's suggestion that earth might not have been a fully formed rocky planet at the time of impact might be worth exploring. ...Or maybe an unusual set of circumstances came together during which something did happen that enabled a rock to pass through earth in its present state.
If the Earth was molten, or not as solid as it is today, then there would be no crater and no mountains formed by such an event. They would have been melted or eroded by now.
Again, the whole thing is nothing but pure conjecture based on a complete ignorance of science, geology, and physics. What I find amazing is that anyone is taking this guy seriously.
March 29, 2010 06:49PM |
March 29, 2010 07:20PM |
March 30, 2010 06:47AM |
March 31, 2010 05:58PM |
March 31, 2010 09:37PM |
March 29, 2010 07:26PM |
|
Re: A Theory Set in Stone: An Asteroid Killed the Dinosaurs, After All March 30, 2010 03:26PM |
Frank... I don't mind a bit of hardball - its harmless fun, and I agree totally with your comments. My previous post was put there just to remind others that rushing to an instant judgement over something so 'new' is not a healthy way to proceed, hence my examples of similar, well known misjudgements that have been made in the past. At the beginning of the impact and exit event book the author concedes that what he believes he has discovered will be difficult for others to accept, especially as this is his first attempt at writing a book (he did admirably IMO). The images on the website actually reveal quite a lot about the rest of the hypothesis, and I guess I understand that after spending so long researching and writing his work he is not going to make it all available without gaining at least some reimbursement. I'd do the same. There are guys out there funded quite well for doing similar work as we read these posts.
The point about ballistics that mrcondron makes is an interesting one. Does anyone know whether anything can pass through another object and exit out of the other side (or at least the force of impact passing through and exiting out of the other side) on such a scale? Because if there are, then the impact and exit event must be considered a possibility. Maybe we are all basing our initial 'it's impossible' assumptions on our belief that earth was a solid mass when the impact-exit event is said to have occured. If the internal and/or external structure of earth wasn't what it is today, then what would it need to be for an impact and exit event to occur?
The point about ballistics that mrcondron makes is an interesting one. Does anyone know whether anything can pass through another object and exit out of the other side (or at least the force of impact passing through and exiting out of the other side) on such a scale? Because if there are, then the impact and exit event must be considered a possibility. Maybe we are all basing our initial 'it's impossible' assumptions on our belief that earth was a solid mass when the impact-exit event is said to have occured. If the internal and/or external structure of earth wasn't what it is today, then what would it need to be for an impact and exit event to occur?
March 30, 2010 03:39PM |
Quote
Finchy
...The point about ballistics that mrcondron makes is an interesting one. Does anyone know whether anything can pass through another object and exit out of the other side (or at least the force of impact passing through and exiting out of the other side) on such a scale?
Not possible. The velocities and energies are just too great.
Quote
Because if there are, then the impact and exit event must be considered a possibility.
It never was considered a possibility and never can be. Six mile wide rocks just don't go flying through rocky planets. One of the gas planets, maybe, but definitely NOT the Earth.
Quote
Maybe we are all basing our initial 'it's impossible' assumptions on our belief that earth was a solid mass when the impact-exit event is said to have occured.
The Earth was solid enough for dinosaurs to be walking on it. The Earth is as solid now as it was 36 million years ago.
Quote
If the internal and/or external structure of earth wasn't what it is today, then what would it need to be for an impact and exit event to occur?
The structure of the Earth is no different now than it was 36 million years ago. Even asking the question shows the questioner is completely ignorant of geology and physics. I can assure you that this guys conjecture is entirely BS and should not be considered, in any way, a scientific hypothesis.
March 30, 2010 05:12PM |
Even the gas planets are not entirely gas. They have solid cores deep within them.
Anyway, the writer is ignorant of basic physical properties. Let's say for arguements sake the object is a solid diamond, the hardest substance known. Let's also say for arguements sake the Earth was a ball of molten lava with no solid structure anywhere. The speed necessary to penetrate the Earth only a few miles would vaporize that 6-mile wide diamond as well as much of the lava it hit. If the speed was insanely high enough for the energy of the impact to pass through the Earth it would explode the entire planet. Please note I said the "energy" of the impact, not the object itself. At high impact speeds any fluid (molten lava or ocean water) will have the net effect of a solid.
I don't think the writer has any useful concept of speed, mass, or inertia. If he did he would not be dumb enough to toss around such idiosy, pretending it was theoretically possible. Perhaps it would be beneficial if the writer would literally belly jump off a 20' high diving platform into a swimming pool and write about how soft the landing was.
This entire BS is all about making money selling a book. Maybe I should write a book detailing my theory that the rings of Saturn are made up entirely of lost airline luggage! Then I could post the theory on this forum and test your reactions.
Anyway, the writer is ignorant of basic physical properties. Let's say for arguements sake the object is a solid diamond, the hardest substance known. Let's also say for arguements sake the Earth was a ball of molten lava with no solid structure anywhere. The speed necessary to penetrate the Earth only a few miles would vaporize that 6-mile wide diamond as well as much of the lava it hit. If the speed was insanely high enough for the energy of the impact to pass through the Earth it would explode the entire planet. Please note I said the "energy" of the impact, not the object itself. At high impact speeds any fluid (molten lava or ocean water) will have the net effect of a solid.
I don't think the writer has any useful concept of speed, mass, or inertia. If he did he would not be dumb enough to toss around such idiosy, pretending it was theoretically possible. Perhaps it would be beneficial if the writer would literally belly jump off a 20' high diving platform into a swimming pool and write about how soft the landing was.
This entire BS is all about making money selling a book. Maybe I should write a book detailing my theory that the rings of Saturn are made up entirely of lost airline luggage! Then I could post the theory on this forum and test your reactions.
March 30, 2010 05:54PM |
Quote
tomdisco
This entire BS is all about making money selling a book. Maybe I should write a book detailing my theory that the rings of Saturn are made up entirely of lost airline luggage! Then I could post the theory on this forum and test your reactions.
If needed, I have a fairly good idea where you could find three coauthors.
March 30, 2010 07:21PM |
Quote
tomdisco
....This entire BS is all about making money selling a book. Maybe I should write a book detailing my theory that the rings of Saturn are made up entirely of lost airline luggage! Then I could post the theory on this forum and test your reactions.
I think you've stumbled onto something there.... but it's not luggage.... those rings are made up of all the socks that disappeared in the dryer. A clump formed in the ring, making it off balance, and that clump was spun out at a high rate of speed. It hit the Earth and caused the Himalayas. That's not snow on those mountains; it's the lint from the socks.
March 31, 2010 11:50AM |
Quote
Dave
Quote
tomdisco
....This entire BS is all about making money selling a book. Maybe I should write a book detailing my theory that the rings of Saturn are made up entirely of lost airline luggage! Then I could post the theory on this forum and test your reactions.
I think you've stumbled onto something there.... but it's not luggage.... those rings are made up of all the socks that disappeared in the dryer. A clump formed in the ring, making it off balance, and that clump was spun out at a high rate of speed. It hit the Earth and caused the Himalayas. That's not snow on those mountains; it's the lint from the socks.
Dave, I though everyone knew that.
March 31, 2010 07:39PM |
Quote
tomdisco
Quote
Dave
Quote
tomdisco
....This entire BS is all about making money selling a book. Maybe I should write a book detailing my theory that the rings of Saturn are made up entirely of lost airline luggage! Then I could post the theory on this forum and test your reactions.
I think you've stumbled onto something there.... but it's not luggage.... those rings are made up of all the socks that disappeared in the dryer. A clump formed in the ring, making it off balance, and that clump was spun out at a high rate of speed. It hit the Earth and caused the Himalayas. That's not snow on those mountains; it's the lint from the socks.
Dave, I though everyone knew that.
I am glad to read some sound logic has entered this thread! (I always wondered what happened to those socks and gloves, too)
April 01, 2010 06:27AM |
April 01, 2010 01:54PM |
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
