Dinosaur extinction was probably by Sun particles

[lbiarge]

(hypothesis against the mainstream)

 

Actual theory accepted today says that dinosaur extinction is by a meteorite but this has many problems.

A meteorite could to kill all animals or big animals but extinct all dinosaurs (less birds). Dinosaurs was big and also little (“Dinosaur size” in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaur_size not say the moment but say that was so little like 30 cm).

Dinosaurs only exist on land, in the sea were reptiles.

After the extinction not exist none dinosaur, only the birds that are a branch considered a branch of the dinosaurs (“birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs” - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaur )

So, ask: How is possible that all dinosaurs disappear from a meteorite, same that of 30 cm but not birds and not other little animals?

“the new extinction and impact dates are precise to within 11,000 years, the researchers said” - in “New Evidence Suggests Comet or Asteroid Impact Was Last Straw for Dinosaurs” in http://paleontoriano.blogspot.com.es/2013/02/new-evidence-suggests-comet-or-asteroid.html : this is to say that we today can extinct by a meteorite impacted in Earth made 11,000 years?

In other words: What is the possibility that a total specie extinction by a meteorite and not the rest including any sub-specie like birds?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

My hypothesis:

So is near or more probably that dinosaurs extinct by a big Sun particles eruption and more in time where the polarity magnetic is changing or with very low intensity in the magnetic field of the Earth.

In this situation an specie not well prepared for particles emission can extinct, against this specie others species that live in burrows have more protection and also any species like bird that may accept the radiation.

Exist species that admit radiation is true, for example in the poles of the Earth there is not protection against the Sun particles eruption and live animals, also there are live bacteria that live in water of the nuclear reactors.

Is probably that birds by admission of radiation or by making their nest in places with protection and very little animals that live in burrows could survive at Sun particles that cannot the dinosaurs that not make burrows. (also consider that not all species of birds and little animals need to survive for survive their specie).

It’s known that in time of the dinosaur extinction survive many little animals include mammals (look with these terms: survive dinosaur extinction). Also it’s known that the Earth change the magnetic polarity and the magnetic field has variations and also that the Sun emission also has variations.

This hypothesis maybe true o false, but it’s more probably that extinction by an asteroid.

A criminal proof could to be proof Sun particles emission on birds, but maybe not because it’s probably that actual birds not admit theirs.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Now consider the extinction is by asteroids?

 

Asks:

 

Why are extinct all dinosaurs and same that little of 30 cm? Also flying dinosaurs different from birds?

 

Why not extinct the birds?

 

Why other little animals not are extinct in that time? All not extinct animals were less of 30 cm?

 

Why from a asteroid collapse to Earth from until 11,000 years old only an specie disappear and not all or none?

 

(this topic has relation to Life in Earth is by Moon and 3 articles more over Moon and Earth

 

 

Thanks.

© Luis Biarge Baldellou. - webpage :

[pwagen]

So, ask: How is possible that all dinosaurs disappear from a meteorite, same that of 30 cm but not birds and not other little animals?

From the Dinosaur Wikipedia page:

"The discovery that birds are a type of dinosaur showed that dinosaurs in general are not, in fact, extinct as is commonly stated.^[123] However, all non-avian dinosaurs as well as many groups of birds did suddenly become extinct approximately 66 million years ago. Many other groups of animals also became extinct at this time, including ammonites (nautilus-like mollusks), mosasaurs, plesiosaurs, pterosaurs, and many groups of mammals."

 

So, not only dinosaurs, but lots of other groups.

 

“the new extinction and impact dates are precise to within 11,000 years, the researchers said” - in “New Evidence Suggests Comet or Asteroid Impact Was Last Straw for Dinosaurs” in http://paleontoriano.blogspot.com.es/2013/02/new-evidence-suggests-comet-or-asteroid.html : this is to say that we today can extinct by a meteorite impacted in Earth made 11,000 years?

 

This is probably a problem with the language barrier, and I apologize if this isn't what you meant. But "precis to within 11,000 years", in this case, means that they can say the event happened within that time-span. So it could have happened 5,500 years before the date they found, or it could have happened 5,500 years after, or anytime in between those dates.

 

Why are extinct all dinosaurs and same that little of 30 cm? Also flying dinosaurs different from birds?

Why not extinct the birds?

There were most likely no flying dinosaurs.

http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/dinosaurs/questions/faq/Flying.shtml

Birds evolved, as you say, from theropods, but they couldn't actually fly until way after the mass extinction took place.

 

As for why some animals went extinct and some didn't, it probably had to do with why a lot of species have gone extinct over the years - they couldn't adapt to their new environment. And on that note...

 

Why other little animals not are extinct in that time? All not extinct animals were less of 30 cm?

Food availability could play a big role. A big animal needs more food to sustain itself, while a small animal can get by with the bits and pieces it can find in a bad food situation.

 

Also, your idea seems to have the same "problems" as the impact theory - why some animals rather than any other. The question is, can we find evidence it happened? Are the rock layers from that time radiated to show the Sun was more active around that time, and radiated the planet? Can we find evidence the magnetic poles changed?

[lbiarge]

From the Dinosaur Wikipedia page:

"The discovery that birds are a type of dinosaur showed that dinosaurs in general are not, in fact, extinct as is commonly stated.^[123] However, all non-avian dinosaurs as well as many groups of birds did suddenly become extinct approximately 66 million years ago. Many other groups of animals also became extinct at this time, including ammonites (nautilus-like mollusks), mosasaurs, plesiosaurs, pterosaurs, and many groups of mammals."

 

So, not only dinosaurs, but lots of other groups.

 

Yes, but not all mammals, ... only all dinosuars less birds or ancestor of birds.

This is probably a problem with the language barrier, and I apologize if this isn't what you meant. But "precis to within 11,000 years", in this case, means that they can say the event happened within that time-span. So it could have happened 5,500 years before the date they found, or it could have happened 5,500 years after, or anytime in between those dates.

 

This give not precission.

As for why some animals went extinct and some didn't, it probably had to do with why a lot of species have gone extinct over the years - they couldn't adapt to their new environment. And on that note...

This is another question and without relation to meteorite and dinosaurs, for this is more time, extinction of dinosaurs is in few time.

Also, your idea seems to have the same "problems" as the impact theory - why some animals rather than any other. The question is, can we find evidence it happened? Are the rock layers from that time radiated to show the Sun was more active around that time, and radiated the planet? Can we find evidence the magnetic poles changed?

 

Is proved that any species admit strange conditions (animals in noth pole, ...) like admit radiations, but there is not proved that a meteorite collision could to be admitted by any species and not by others.

 

Like you say is needed to find evidences but not only for my hypothesys, also for the admitted theory of the extinction by meteorite.

 

Is proved also that Earth has impact of meteorites and also that many times has changed the magnetic poles and changes in magnetic field.

 

More: is proved (until is know today) that only birds of ancestor of birds is the only dinosaur survive this period, also the land is a good protection and would be probably that survival animals would protect from radiation from land but more difficult from collision winter, also for vegetables, not only animals.

 

Edited February 23, 2013 by lbiarge

[John Cuthber]

There are records of many pole reversals, but few extinctions.

So, pole reversals don't cause extinctions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomagnetic_reversal

Also, the timings are wrong.

[lbiarge]

There are records of many pole reversals, but few extinctions.

So, pole reversals don't cause extinctions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomagnetic_reversal

Also, the timings are wrong.

 

Yes, in same form that many meteorites and few extinctions. So like you say "So, meteorites don't cause extinctions."

 

In same form that by a meteorite would to be a big one, I speak over a probably low magnetic field and a big emission of Sun particles at same time (probability is low, but also in all Earth history only 1 maxive extinction).

 

According to your note seem that pole reversals cannot because there are many and against it meteorite can without have importance that also are many (the same answer is usefull for one solution and not for the other).

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

more:

 

Why Did Crocodiles Survive the K/T Extinction? (5 theories without 1 proof) - http://dinosaurs.about.com/od/dinosaurextinction/a/Why-Did-Crocodiles-Survive-The-KT-Extinction.htm

 

Tough turtle survived what dinosaurs couldn't - http://tortoiseblog.com/tough-turtle-survived-what-dinosaurs-couldnt

 

and so I can add many more.

Edited February 23, 2013 by lbiarge

[John Cuthber]

Did you not read the bit about the timing being wrong, or did you not understand it?

[Moontanman]

There were most likely no flying dinosaurs.

http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/dinosaurs/questions/faq/Flying.shtml

Birds evolved, as you say, from theropods, but they couldn't actually fly until way after the mass extinction took place.

 

 

that is not entirely accurate, there were many types of flying birds before the extinction event at the K/T boundary...

 

 

 

 

[lbiarge]

Did you not read the bit about the timing being wrong, or did you not understand it?

 

I don't understand, according to the page you say "17 reversals took place in the span of 3 million years", the moment of the dinosaur extinction not need to be the more important or complete

 

"The geomagnetic field changes on time scales from milliseconds to millions of years" in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_magnetic_field

 

"Data from THEMIS show that the magnetic field, which interacts with the solar wind, is reduced when the magnetic orientation is aligned between Sun and Earth - opposite to the previous hypothesis" - in same page

 

"Changes in Earth's magnetic field on a time scale of a year or more are referred to as secular variation. Over hundreds of years, magnetic declination is observed to vary over tens of degrees" - in same page

 

The magnetic field is changing constantly and also the solar wind, so imagine the many times in a million years.

 

I repeat, it's not necessary a total poles interchange or zero magnetic field, the combinations with low magnetic field and solar wind and/or Sun particles are infinites.

 

Today the Sun is growing their activity that repeat near every 11 years.

Edited February 23, 2013 by lbiarge

[pwagen]

Yes, in same form that many meteorites and few extinctions. So like you say "So, meteorites don't cause extinctions."

But that also depends on the size of the meteorite. Sure, we're bombarded by rocks from space daily, but very few are big enough to do a lot of damage, and even fewer are as big as the one thought to have wiped out the dinosaurs.

 

In same form that by a meteorite would to be a big one, I speak over a probably low magnetic field and a big emission of Sun particles at same time (probability is low, but also in all Earth history only 1 maxive extinction).

There have been five or so. Not all are thought to have been caused by meteorites though.

 

Why Did Crocodiles Survive the K/T Extinction? (5 theories without 1 proof) - http://dinosaurs.about.com/od/dinosaurextinction/a/Why-Did-Crocodiles-Survive-The-KT-Extinction.htm

 

Tough turtle survived what dinosaurs couldn't - http://tortoiseblog.com/tough-turtle-survived-what-dinosaurs-couldnt

 

and so I can add many more.

That's doesn't prove anything though. A lot of animals went extinct, a lot of animals survived. Obviously the animals that survived managed to adapt to the new living situation.

 

And it seems you think the impact theory says the animals were killed by the impact itself. But that's not the case. While there was a mass extinction in a relatively short time, From what I remember of the theory, debris was flung into the air by the impact, which blocked out the Sun and cooled the planet. It also seems there was an unusually high volcanic activity at the time, which didn't help. In the end, herbivores died from lack of edible plants and carnivores died because their food died out. But all this could have taken a few hundred years, it wasn't instant.

 

 

 

that is not entirely accurate, there were many types of flying birds before the extinction event at the K/T boundary...

I didn't think dinosaurs were classified as birds (or developed flight) until after the event. But looking up on it now, you're very right!

[lbiarge]

The probabilities and characteristics for the dinosaurs extintion are many but all their against an impact of a meteorite, but like the theories say this all people believe that without proofs.

 

But that also depends on the size of the meteorite. Sure, we're bombarded by rocks from space daily, but very few are big enough to do a lot of damage, and even fewer are as big as the one thought to have wiped out the dinosaurs.

 

In same form also if were by solar wind and lower magnetic field would to be of big size.

There have been five or so. Not all are thought to have been caused by meteorites though.

 

Sure? and the probably underwater collisions, and the collisions erased by wind, water, erosion, ...?

 

for example "10 Greatest Major-Impact Craters on Earth" in http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/featured/10-greatest-major-impact-craters-on-earth/1403 not say 5, not 10, only say the 10 greatest.

 

Many craters are not discovered or discovered now :

 

Also look the Moon, you can see many impacts, and the Moon is very little compared to Earth. in 2012 "Earth's oldest impact crater found in Greenland" in http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21996-earths-oldest-impact-crater-found-in-greenland.html

And not only meteorites impact, also explosion of volcanoes, look the krakatoa explosion "Year Without a Summer" that probably are more - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer - This was little but the probability of bigger is also possible, this occurs in 1816 (very near compared to the time of the dinosaur extinction).

But that also depends on the size of the meteorite. Sure, we're bombarded by rocks from space daily, but very few are big enough to do a lot of damage, and even fewer are as

And it seems you think the impact theory says the animals were killed by the impact itself. But that's not the case. While there was a mass extinction in a relatively short time, From what I remember of the theory, debris was flung into the air by the impact, which blocked out the Sun and cooled the planet. It also seems there was an unusually high volcanic activity at the time, which didn't help. In the end, herbivores died from lack of edible plants and carnivores died because their food died out. But all this could have taken a few hundred years, it wasn't instant.

 

This really difficult more, without eat the probability of total dead is very high.

 

If really would be a meteorite in many years, that means that none vegetable grow (look krakatoa explosion and year without summer), without vegetables carnivores live a time eating dead animals, but if the time is very long " blocked out the Sun and cooled the planet" the result would to be near all dead.

 

This you say also is against the meteorite impact theory

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Probably I go to use the krakatoa explosion and the "Year Without a Summer" like another proof against the meteorite impact theory

 

If you like we can write over the "Year Without a Summer" and the probably effect if against only 1 year were for example 100 years or 1000 years without light, without plants germination, ...

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Also this of long time is good for my hypothesis.

 

Imagine the effect of radiation in long time, the animals and plants are worse, the generations go bad and end in extinction.

 

Against this the effect of no Sun light and not germination is dead and total extiction of all animals, nor more seeds, ... this would be a probably end of total life in the Earth.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Also the problem like occur in "Year Without a Summer" where the seed not germinate, the result was not seeds, not plants, ... the problem was terrible, I see this in any documentary. Imagine in more years.

Edited February 23, 2013 by lbiarge

[Moontanman]

The impact that supposedly killed the dinosaurs was orders of magnitude bigger than the explosion of Krakatoa...

[lbiarge]

The impact that supposedly killed the dinosaurs was orders of magnitude bigger than the explosion of Krakatoa...

 

Is clear, but according to this theory that was many years and darkness the sky.

 

The krakatoa was only a year, not make darkness but snow in summer, hunger, dead, not harvest, not seeds, in only 1 year, imagine many years with the sky darkness. I believe remember that also was extinctions of any vegetables by end of theirs seeds.

 

You can read over that year without summer, there are information, and this is a real and documented information over the effect of a few dust in the atmosphere without darkness of Sun but with result of a year without summer.

 

If a very simple explosion of a volcano was so many difficult, a big impact would to be many more, so much that the unique probably result is the total extinction of all life.

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Over this year without summer

 

"old farmers in the state referred to 1816 as "eighteen hundred and starve to death." - http://history1800s.about.com/od/crimesanddisasters/a/The-Year-Without-A-Summer.htm

 

" It is estimated that 100,000 Irish perished during this period" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer

 

"European fatality total of 200,000 deaths." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer

 

And the impact for dinosaurs would to be infinitelly bigger and many more years. (probably thousand of years).

Edited February 23, 2013 by lbiarge

[Moontanman]

Is clear, but according to this theory that was many years and darkness the sky.

 

The krakatoa was only a year, not make darkness but snow in summer, hunger, dead, not harvest, not seeds, in only 1 year, imagine many years with the sky darkness. I believe remember that also was extinctions of any vegetables by end of theirs seeds.

 

You can read over that year without summer, there are information, and this is a real and documented information over the effect of a few dust in the atmosphere without darkness of Sun but with result of a year without summer.

 

If a very simple explosion of a volcano was so many difficult, a big impact would to be many more, so much that the unique probably result is the total extinction of all life.

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Over this year without summer

 

"old farmers in the state referred to 1816 as "eighteen hundred and starve to death." - http://history1800s.about.com/od/crimesanddisasters/a/The-Year-Without-A-Summer.htm

 

" It is estimated that 100,000 Irish perished during this period" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer

 

"European fatality total of 200,000 deaths." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer

 

And the impact for dinosaurs would to be thousend of times bigger and many more years.

 

It would all depend on the size of the impactor. The K/T extinction killed off 75% of all species. the Earth has been hit just as many times as the moon but erosion wipes out the evidence of craters on the earth the moon has no such erosion and bears it's scars for billions of years...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous%E2%80%93Paleogene_extinction_event

 

 

There is some evidence of a multiple impact event and not just one...

 

Multiple impact event

Several other craters also appear to have been formed about the time of the K–T boundary. This suggests the possibility of near simultaneous multiple impacts, perhaps from a fragmented asteroidal object, similar to the Shoemaker–Levy 9 impact with Jupiter. In addition to the 180 km (110 mi) Chicxulub Crater, there is the 24 km (15 mi) Boltysh crater in Ukraine (65.17 ± 0.64 Ma), the 20 km (12 mi) Silverpit crater, a suspected impact crater in the North Sea(60–65 Ma), and the controversial and much larger 600 km (370 mi) Shiva crater. Any other craters that might have formed in the Tethys Ocean would have been obscured by tectonic events like the relentless northward drift of Africa and India.^{[117][118][119][120]}

Edited February 23, 2013 by Moontanman

[lbiarge]

 

It would all depend on the size of the impactor. The K/T extinction killed off 75% of all species. the Earth has been hit just as many times as the moon but erosion wipes out the evidence of craters on the earth the moon has no such erosion and bears it's scars for billions of years...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous%E2%80%93Paleogene_extinction_event

 

 

There is some evidence of a multiple impact event and not just one...

 

Any scientists also like a quick extinction: "“The length of time taken for the extinction to occur is a controversial issue, because some theories about the extinction's causes require a rapid extinction over a relatively short period (from a few years to a few thousand years) while others require longer periods.” - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous%E2%80%93Paleogene_extinction_event

 

 

But “fossil-bearing rock which cover a time range from several million years before the K–Pg extinction to a few million years after it” - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous%E2%80%93Paleogene_extinction_event

 

This make a probably extinction duration of: "“during the last 10 million years of the Cretaceous” - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous%E2%80%93Paleogene_extinction_event

 

So a so long extinction would need a big impact efective near to 10 million years.

 

Joining this with the "year without summer" say that extinction by impact only is impossible.

[Ophiolite]

We are moving towards a consensus that several species and genera were already environmentally stressed towards the end of the Cretaceous. This was exacerbated by the extensive volcanic activity that produced the Deccan Traps. The Chicxulub impact was the final nail in the coffin of many individuals and many species.

 

You seem not to have understood the inevitable uncertainties in the dating process. That is why the recently determined precision of 11,000 years, which you dismissed as "not precise", is so important. 11,000 years in geological terms is instantaneous.

 

You might want to look into the proliferation of ferns after the KT event and tell me how your unfounded 'sun particle' theory explains that.

[lbiarge]

We are moving towards a consensus that several species and genera were already environmentally stressed towards the end of the Cretaceous. This was exacerbated by the extensive volcanic activity that produced the Deccan Traps. The Chicxulub impact was the final nail in the coffin of many individuals and many species.

 

You seem not to have understood the inevitable uncertainties in the dating process. That is why the recently determined precision of 11,000 years, which you dismissed as "not precise", is so important. 11,000 years in geological terms is instantaneous.

 

You might want to look into the proliferation of ferns after the KT event and tell me how your unfounded 'sun particle' theory explains that.

 

That you and many "are moving towards a consensus" not means that is true.

 

What you say is only impossible: "This was exacerbated by the extensive volcanic activity that produced the Deccan Traps. The Chicxulub impact" imagine their probability, years of extensive volcanic and end with a impact, the probability probably is 1 between trillions.

 

I have put the example of kakratoa, a simple volcanic explosion with duration effect of near 1 year, and you speak over million years.

 

"You might want to look into the proliferation of ferns after the KT event and tell me how your unfounded 'sun particle' theory explains that." - I can, but: Do you can?

 

A easy explanation is that with the lower activity and dead of other plants you give a new posivility to plants without a problem. Now give me you explanation with volcanoes and impact.

[Ophiolite]

That you and many "are moving towards a consensus" not means that is true.

Correct. But a consensus of informed scientific opinion is more likely to be correct than misininformed and misinterpreted opinion expressed by an individual.

 

 

 

 

What you say is only impossible: "This was exacerbated by the extensive volcanic activity that produced the Deccan Traps. The Chicxulub impact" imagine their probability, years of extensive volcanic and end with a impact, the probability probably is 1 between trillions.

The volcanic activity did not end with an impact. Such extensive vulcanism is unusual, but certainly not unique. (The Siberian Traps, from 230 m.y.a. and the more recent, thogh smaller, Columbia Flood Basalts are obvious examples.) The odds of a major impact occuring during an extensive large scale eruption are probably around four or five to one.

 

 

 

 

I have put the example of kakratoa, a simple volcanic explosion with duration effect of near 1 year, and you speak over million years.

I am not speaking over millions of years. The vulcanism extended over many millions of years, but the impact and the resultant major extinction was a matter of a few years, or perhaps a decade or so.

 

 

 

 

 

"You might want to look into the proliferation of ferns after the KT event and tell me how your unfounded 'sun particle' theory explains that." - I can, but: Do you can? A easy explanation is that with the lower activity and dead of other plants you give a new posivility to plants without a problem. Now give me you explanation with volcanoes and impact.

 

Well, the explanation works for both, but remind me of exactly how your 'sun particles' wipe out most plant life on the planet.

[lbiarge]

Correct. But a consensus of informed scientific opinion is more likely to be correct than misininformed and misinterpreted opinion expressed by an individual.

 

It's correct, but the same occurs with Copernic, many scientist could not fail against one person.

 

Same with all the scientifist advances, a scientist advance always is against the consensus, Earth not flat, Earth not the center of the universe, expecies evolution, ...

 

 

I am not speaking over millions of years. The vulcanism extended over many millions of years, but the impact and the resultant major extinction was a matter of a few years, or perhaps a decade or so.

 

Sorry, that you say is against proofs:

 

Any scientists also like a quick extinction: "“The length of time taken for the extinction to occur is a controversial issue, because some theories about the extinction's causes require a rapid extinction over a relatively short period (from a few years to a few thousand years) while others require longer periods.” - http://en.wikipedia....xtinction_event

 

But “fossil-bearing rock which cover a time range from several million years before the K–Pg extinction to a few million years after it” - http://en.wikipedia....xtinction_event

 

This make a probably extinction duration of: "“during the last 10 million years of the Cretaceous” - http://en.wikipedia....xtinction_event

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

In the planet considered in periods of million or millions years would be all very vulcanism, but this not extinct species, probably any moments the vulcanism is more but if dark the sky all the animmals die if the period is long, for this I put the example of the year without summer (1 only year).

 

It's totally impossible a very hight activity (volcanoes or impacts without a total extintion of all life.

 

And like it's totally impossible I only can to say that "Correct. But a consensus of informed scientific opinion is more likely to be correct than misininformed and misinterpreted opinion expressed by an individual." only means that this consensus of informed scientific is only a consensus over an impossible.

 

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Another example: During Carboniferous period many mountains were created, but I think you not understant any animal would to run from the land because in that moment a mountain grow in his legs.

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Maybe I would made 2 topics, my hypothesis is only a hypothesis, maybe true or false but actual admitted theory only can to be false, so my hypothesis always has more probabilities to be true that another option 100% false.

Edited February 25, 2013 by lbiarge

[lbiarge]

Really scientist accept that impact cannot to be the cause of extinction:

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Any scientists also like a quick extinction: "“The length of time taken for the extinction to occur is a controversial issue, because some theories about the extinction's causes require a rapid extinction over a relatively short period (from a few years to a few thousand years) while others require longer periods.” - http://en.wikipedia....xtinction_event

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

A big extinction with vulcanism and impact with the dark sky and according to that without germination of plants would be the end of all life.

 

Or: Do you know any animal than can life 1 year without eat?, any that can admit 10 years without eat? 100 years? 1000 years?

 

In the sea there are animals that live in dark, but this animals live from eat that fall down from the upper sea by gravity. This in a dark land cannot occur.

Edited February 26, 2013 by lbiarge

[pwagen]

Any scientists also like a quick extinction: "“The length of time taken for the extinction to occur is a controversial issue, because some theories about the extinction's causes require a rapid extinction over a relatively short period (from a few years to a few thousand years) while others require longer periods.” - http://en.wikipedia....xtinction_event

 

But “fossil-bearing rock which cover a time range from several million years before the K–Pg extinction to a few million years after it” - http://en.wikipedia....xtinction_event

 

 

Any scientists also like a quick extinction: "“The length of time taken for the extinction to occur is a controversial issue, because some theories about the extinction's causes require a rapid extinction over a relatively short period (from a few years to a few thousand years) while others require longer periods.” - http://en.wikipedia....xtinction_event

 

 

But “fossil-bearing rock which cover a time range from several million years before the K–Pg extinction to a few million years after it” - http://en.wikipedia....xtinction_event

 

Reminds me of something...

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/73213-how-to-post-on-science-forums-a-guide-for-quacks/

[lbiarge]

Reminds me of something...

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/73213-how-to-post-on-science-forums-a-guide-for-quacks/

 

Sorry.

 

But this confirm that really scientists not believe that they say. They would like a quick impact but all proof show this is not the reality.

 

Against this all say that scientists say true with impact.

 

Sorry another time.

Edited February 26, 2013 by lbiarge

[lbiarge]

Supposing I’m wrong and you have reason and dinosaurs extinction is by meteorite:

Why a lower emission of particles to the atmosphere in kakratoa take not germination of plants in year and a very more big emission has not problem and permit dinosaurs life until 1 million years more? This can you admit with volcanoes and end with impact or like you prefer.

Why an impact extinct all dinosaurs and same also so little like 30 cm and not extinct crocodiles, and other animals of more size? – consider that also extinct other animals.

Why birds that descent of the dinosaurs would not extinct and extinct all the other dinosaurs?

How can to be that the sky would dark, plants not make the photosynthesis and from that dead all dinosaurs and not other animals?

What eat the other animals that million years that are without photosynthesis and only dead all the dinosaurs?

Can to be volcanoes and impact without dead plants and without end photosynthesis and to be many dead and all the dinosaurs and not all live?

How is possible that not all plant are extinct with a dark sky?

How is possible that kakratoa explosion difficult the germination by the year without summer with the risk of lose vegetal species and many years of emission not take this risk and only extinct dinosaurs and few more?

Why the evidence and proofs are insufficient to understand and impossible?

Why kakratoa explosion is not useful to understand what happen in an explosion or impact?

Why none evidence is an evidence of existence of impact?

Why if volcanoes or impact over 1 million years could extinct all life, is probably consider for only extinct an specie?

Why if an impact would be in a court period and studies show that the extinction was in a very large period yet consider the most probably an impact that is impossible the relation impact and extinction in large period?

Why an impossible say by people with reputation not reduce their reputation and yet is considered a good possibility?

 

 

How much animals you know that can exist 1 year without eat? 100 years? a million years?

 

 

Note 1: An emission of particles of the Sun could explain all this but not an impact. In a emission the big animals would receive more particles, also it would have more difficult to take a ceiling for protection, against the animals that go into den, nest. Also is probably that one specie would be more sensitive to radiation and no others.

 

Note 2: I can’t find any explanation to all this with impact or volcanoes that dark the sky.

Edited February 27, 2013 by lbiarge

[Bignose]

Why none evidence is an evidence of existence of impact?

Really? http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/03/0307_030307_impactcrater.html

 

I'm not going to answer every other question, but I bet there are answers for them if you look for them. And then you can find evidence to support why people think those are the answers. E.g. You can find the research papers where the evidence was dug up, examined, and conclusions drawn.

 

Your unnamed 'sun particles' idea has a lot of holes and will need a lot of evidence to support it. For example, you need to name what kind of particle is responsible. We know quite a good deal about how radiation acts and how it reacts with other matter. Hence, there would be evidence of radiation from the sun based on those interactions. We'd be able to see this evidence in the fossilized bones, plants, eggs, etc.

[Przemyslaw.Gruchala]

Imagine that meteorite, comet, sun activity or intergalactic activity is killing organisms. 99.99% of them.

 

If organism is so big as dinosaur or whale 99.99% from 1000 living organisms around the world is 999 killed animals. Too small to continue species.

 

The smaller organism the more quantity, 99.99% from 1,000,000 is 999,900 killed, and 100 alive.

 

Additionally - big organism need a lot of energy to survive.

If during accident vegetable-only eating animals will die, due lack of vegetables,

for a short period of time, big meat-eaters will have enough food,

but after 1-2 weeks, meat will be not fresh and not eat able and they will die too.

Small size everything eating organisms less specialized such as rats will have food for longer time.

Due to larger initial population prior accident have more chance to survive.

 

and not extinct crocodiles

 

Crocodiles are eating even ill dead hippos.

Additionally living mostly in water, so they have fishes.

They don't waste energy, remain inactive most of time, could starve for months.

Edited February 27, 2013 by Przemyslaw.Gruchala

[lbiarge]

Imagine that meteorite, comet, sun activity or intergalactic activity is killing organisms. 99.99% of them.

 

If organism is so big as dinosaur or whale 99.99% from 1000 living organisms around the world is 999 killed animals. Too small to continue species.

 

The smaller organism the more quantity, 99.99% from 1,000,000 is 999,900 killed, and 100 alive.

 

Additionally - big organism need a lot of energy to survive.

If during accident vegetable-only eating animals will die, due lack of vegetables,

for a short period of time, big meat-eaters will have enough food,

but after 1-2 weeks, meat will be not fresh and not eat able and they will die too.

Small size everything eating organisms less specialized such as rats will have food for longer time.

Due to larger initial population prior accident have more chance to survive.

 

 

Crocodiles are eating even ill dead hippos.

Additionally living mostly in water, so they have fishes.

They don't waste energy, remain inactive most of time, could starve for months.

 

Good, a million years. Very good.

 

Really? http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/03/0307_030307_impactcrater.html

 

I'm not going to answer every other question, but I bet there are answers for them if you look for them. And then you can find evidence to support why people think those are the answers. E.g. You can find the research papers where the evidence was dug up, examined, and conclusions drawn.

 

Your unnamed 'sun particles' idea has a lot of holes and will need a lot of evidence to support it. For example, you need to name what kind of particle is responsible. We know quite a good deal about how radiation acts and how it reacts with other matter. Hence, there would be evidence of radiation from the sun based on those interactions. We'd be able to see this evidence in the fossilized bones, plants, eggs, etc.

 

Also are evidences or many other impacts without extinction.

 

Also are evidences of volcano explosions ,....

 

And?