Tsunami wiped out the dinasaurs

On 31 Dec 2004 23:27:20 -0800, "don findlay" wrote:


Wally Anglesea™ wrote:
On 31 Dec 2004 18:09:52 -0800, "don findlay"
wrote:

Meteorite impacts leave evidence, like trace elements in the right
places, and at the right "depths". Earthquakes don't.


LIPS over millions of years are are "not evidence", but trace elements
on Tuesday are?? Is this the logic we're up against, Commander?
This encounter will be difficult.

There's a **** more evidence for meteorites than your silly
"Inflatable Earth" theory.

Sorry about that.

--
Maj. General, Fanatic Legions.
Commander of Southern Hemisphere Forces.

Find out about Australia's most dangerous Doomsday Cult:
http://users.bigpond.net.au/wanglese/pebble.htm

I continue to be amazed how any news group discussion invariably degenerates
into a bunch of name calling, semi-flame wars (sometimes actual flame wars),
and a bunch of silly abuse.

Meteorites, asteroids, and comets might leave trace elements (like iridium),
but there is ample evidence for massive volcanic action (such as the deccan
traps), and given plate tectonics and the separation of the continents from
Panagea, we could reasonably hypothesize truly intense earthquakes at times
in earth's history. I am not a geologist, but I suspect there are earthquake
signatures that could be found and dated which would support massive
earthquakes.

This thread started, however, with the assertion that perhaps the dinosaurs
were killed off by a huge tsunami. The question then becomes, could any
truly huge tsunami (or even a series of huge tsunami), regardless of the
cause, do sufficient damage world-wide to kill off the dinosaurs (recalling
that dino fauna have been found in South America, in the arctic, in the
American west, in Australia, etc.) Right off the bat, it doesn't seem
plausible.

e.




"Wally AngleseaT" wrote in
message ...
On 31 Dec 2004 23:27:20 -0800, "don findlay" wrote:


Wally AngleseaT wrote:
On 31 Dec 2004 18:09:52 -0800, "don findlay"
wrote:

Meteorite impacts leave evidence, like trace elements in the right
places, and at the right "depths". Earthquakes don't.


LIPS over millions of years are are "not evidence", but trace elements
on Tuesday are?? Is this the logic we're up against, Commander?
This encounter will be difficult.

There's a **** more evidence for meteorites than your silly
"Inflatable Earth" theory.

Sorry about that.

--
Maj. General, Fanatic Legions.
Commander of Southern Hemisphere Forces.

Find out about Australia's most dangerous Doomsday Cult:
http://users.bigpond.net.au/wanglese/pebble.htm

In article , EarlCox wrote:
The question then becomes, could any
truly huge tsunami (or even a series of huge tsunami), regardless of the
cause, do sufficient damage world-wide to kill off the dinosaurs (recalling
that dino fauna have been found in South America, in the arctic, in the
American west, in Australia, etc.) Right off the bat, it doesn't seem
plausible.

Throw in the demonstrated fact that dinosaurs were living in
mid-Arctic latitudes in the mid-Cretaceous and it gets very hard to argue
that there were *no* dinosaurs in upland areas in the summer hemisphere at
the time of impact/ tsunami, and it gets really hard to sustain the argument.
The point for the asteroid impact hypothesis is that a "asteroid
winter" could last *several years*.

--
Aidan Karley,
Aberdeen, Scotland,
Location: 57°10'11" N, 02°08'43" W (sub-tropical Aberdeen), 0.021233

Exactly. While the elapsed KT transition period was a blink of geological
time, it may have lasted several decades or several centuries. Dinosaur
populations were scattered all over the world and, as recent evidence
suggests, they were very robust and diverse. It is extraordinarily difficult
to image a scenario where a series of tsunami, even huge tsunami, could
obliterate all these populations. And a tsunami event would not explain why
late Mesozoic sea reptiles as well as pterosaurs would also be wiped out.
Unless of course you believe that a few of the sea beasties are still hiding
out in a long thin but very deep lake in Scotland! grin

e.


"Aidan Karley" wrote in message
. invalid...
In article , EarlCox
wrote:
The question then becomes, could any
truly huge tsunami (or even a series of huge tsunami), regardless of the
cause, do sufficient damage world-wide to kill off the dinosaurs
(recalling
that dino fauna have been found in South America, in the arctic, in the
American west, in Australia, etc.) Right off the bat, it doesn't seem
plausible.

Throw in the demonstrated fact that dinosaurs were living in
mid-Arctic latitudes in the mid-Cretaceous and it gets very hard to argue
that there were *no* dinosaurs in upland areas in the summer hemisphere at
the time of impact/ tsunami, and it gets really hard to sustain the
argument.
The point for the asteroid impact hypothesis is that a "asteroid
winter" could last *several years*.

--
Aidan Karley,
Aberdeen, Scotland,
Location: 57°10'11" N, 02°08'43" W (sub-tropical Aberdeen), 0.021233

In article , EarlCox wrote:
While the elapsed KT transition period was a blink of geological
time, it may have lasted several decades or several centuries.

A decidedly moot point. Several hundred thousand years is also a
possibility.

And a tsunami event would not explain why
late Mesozoic sea reptiles as well as pterosaurs would also be wiped out.

The marine "reptiles" certainly; the pterosaurs would only need to be
kept on the wing for a generation or so to be rendered extinct (no one has
seriously suggested that they lay, incubate, hatch on the wing).

Unless of course you believe that a few of the sea beasties are still hiding
out in a long thin but very deep lake in Scotland! grin

Two such lakes (several hundred miles apart).
My aunt swears blind that she's seen one of the beasties from her
garden abutting Loch Ness. Knowing my aunt, I take this as strong evidence of
the non-existance of Nessie.

--
Aidan Karley,
Aberdeen, Scotland,
Location: 57°10'11" N, 02°08'43" W (sub-tropical Aberdeen), 0.021233

"EarlCox" wrote in message
om...
I continue to be amazed how any news group discussion invariably
degenerates
into a bunch of name calling, semi-flame wars (sometimes actual flame
wars),
and a bunch of silly abuse.

Why? This it normal behavior for bob tailed monkeys.


Meteorites, asteroids, and comets might leave trace elements (like
iridium),
but there is ample evidence for massive volcanic action (such as the
deccan
traps), and given plate tectonics and the separation of the continents
from
Panagea, we could reasonably hypothesize truly intense earthquakes at
times
in earth's history. I am not a geologist, but I suspect there are
earthquake
signatures that could be found and dated which would support massive
earthquakes.

You don't get the big quakes where the land is tearing apart. You get the
big ones where they are being shoved past are into each other.

Don't forget exploding volcanoes such as Thera or major land slides several
of which have now been mapped on Hawaii alone though none in historic time.
It does have a huge crack that looks like a big chunk is about ready to go.

This thread started, however, with the assertion that perhaps the
dinosaurs
were killed off by a huge tsunami. The question then becomes, could any
truly huge tsunami (or even a series of huge tsunami), regardless of the
cause, do sufficient damage world-wide to kill off the dinosaurs
(recalling
that dino fauna have been found in South America, in the arctic, in the
American west, in Australia, etc.) Right off the bat, it doesn't seem
plausible.

e.




"Wally AngleseaT" wrote in
message ...
On 31 Dec 2004 23:27:20 -0800, "don findlay" wrote:


Wally AngleseaT wrote:
On 31 Dec 2004 18:09:52 -0800, "don findlay"
wrote:

Meteorite impacts leave evidence, like trace elements in the right
places, and at the right "depths". Earthquakes don't.


LIPS over millions of years are are "not evidence", but trace elements
on Tuesday are?? Is this the logic we're up against, Commander?
This encounter will be difficult.

There's a **** more evidence for meteorites than your silly
"Inflatable Earth" theory.

Sorry about that.

--
Maj. General, Fanatic Legions.
Commander of Southern Hemisphere Forces.

Find out about Australia's most dangerous Doomsday Cult:
http://users.bigpond.net.au/wanglese/pebble.htm

Why do you think that the break up of this large land mass was a movement
away from each other? If you look at the way the plates moved (such as the
swing of the Indian subcontinent), there is plenty of reason to believe that
they smashed into each other as time moved along. As the plates moved, they
probably created really huge subduction points and really large earthquakes.

e.
"deowll" wrote in message
...

"EarlCox" wrote in message
om...
I continue to be amazed how any news group discussion invariably
degenerates
into a bunch of name calling, semi-flame wars (sometimes actual flame
wars),
and a bunch of silly abuse.

Why? This it normal behavior for bob tailed monkeys.


Meteorites, asteroids, and comets might leave trace elements (like
iridium),
but there is ample evidence for massive volcanic action (such as the
deccan
traps), and given plate tectonics and the separation of the continents
from
Panagea, we could reasonably hypothesize truly intense earthquakes at
times
in earth's history. I am not a geologist, but I suspect there are
earthquake
signatures that could be found and dated which would support massive
earthquakes.

You don't get the big quakes where the land is tearing apart. You get the
big ones where they are being shoved past are into each other.

Don't forget exploding volcanoes such as Thera or major land slides
several
of which have now been mapped on Hawaii alone though none in historic
time.
It does have a huge crack that looks like a big chunk is about ready to
go.

This thread started, however, with the assertion that perhaps the
dinosaurs
were killed off by a huge tsunami. The question then becomes, could any
truly huge tsunami (or even a series of huge tsunami), regardless of the
cause, do sufficient damage world-wide to kill off the dinosaurs
(recalling
that dino fauna have been found in South America, in the arctic, in the
American west, in Australia, etc.) Right off the bat, it doesn't seem
plausible.

e.




"Wally AngleseaT" wrote in
message ...
On 31 Dec 2004 23:27:20 -0800, "don findlay" wrote:


Wally AngleseaT wrote:
On 31 Dec 2004 18:09:52 -0800, "don findlay"
wrote:

Meteorite impacts leave evidence, like trace elements in the right
places, and at the right "depths". Earthquakes don't.


LIPS over millions of years are are "not evidence", but trace elements
on Tuesday are?? Is this the logic we're up against, Commander?
This encounter will be difficult.

There's a **** more evidence for meteorites than your silly
"Inflatable Earth" theory.

Sorry about that.

--
Maj. General, Fanatic Legions.
Commander of Southern Hemisphere Forces.

Find out about Australia's most dangerous Doomsday Cult:
http://users.bigpond.net.au/wanglese/pebble.htm

EarlCox wrote:

snip
This thread started, however, with the assertion that perhaps the dinosaurs
were killed off by a huge tsunami. The question then becomes, could any
truly huge tsunami (or even a series of huge tsunami), regardless of the
cause, do sufficient damage world-wide to kill off the dinosaurs (recalling
that dino fauna have been found in South America, in the arctic, in the
American west, in Australia, etc.) Right off the bat, it doesn't seem
plausible.

e.



What ever the mechanism it is unlikely Tsunami, in and of themselves,
were enough to do the deed.

It is more likely that the cause of the Mega-Tsunami we are 'supposing'
about had a cause that had other affects as well.


TBerk

Wally Anglesea=99 wrote:
On 31 Dec 2004 23:27:20 -0800, "don findlay"
wrote:


Wally Anglesea=99 wrote:
On 31 Dec 2004 18:09:52 -0800, "don findlay"
wrote:

Meteorite impacts leave evidence, like trace elements in the right
places, and at the right "depths". Earthquakes don't.


LIPS over millions of years are are "not evidence", but trace
elements
on Tuesday are?? Is this the logic we're up against, Commander?
This encounter will be difficult.

There's a **** more evidence for meteorites than your silly
"Inflatable Earth" theory.

All about Large Igneous Provinces is not my "theory", though it
supports it wonderfully well. It also supports the 'Meteorite on
Tuesday' theory, if you want to stretch a point - I mean a day or two.
Don't you rather like the idea of meteorites crashing through the skin
of the planet, showering golden mantle rain over Dinah? Oozing stuff
all week?

Sorry about that.

--
Maj. General, Fanatic Legions.
Commander of Southern Hemisphere Forces.

Find out about Australia's most dangerous Doomsday Cult:
http://users.bigpond.net.au/wanglese/pebble.htm

Aidan Karley wrote:
In article , EarlCox
wrote:
The question then becomes, could any
truly huge tsunami (or even a series of huge tsunami), regardless
of the
cause, do sufficient damage world-wide to kill off the dinosaurs
(recalling
that dino fauna have been found in South America, in the arctic, in
the
American west, in Australia, etc.) Right off the bat, it doesn't
seem
plausible.

Throw in the demonstrated fact that dinosaurs were living in
mid-Arctic latitudes in the mid-Cretaceous

How do you know they were living there? Their bones are just lying
there right now. That's all. Never heard of continental drift? Once,
Alaska, Antarctica, and China were closely justaposed, in around
(relative to each other) where China is now - with the big bone beds of
the Americas very closely (on a smaller Earth) along strike. (Earth
expansion retrofit)

and it gets very hard to argue
that there were *no* dinosaurs in upland areas in the summer
hemisphere at
the time of impact/ tsunami, and it gets really hard to sustain the
argument.
The point for the asteroid impact hypothesis is that a
"asteroid
winter" could last *several years*.

Not nearly as long as the million or two from the BIG LIPS, that was
happening right under the Dinos feet. Tsunamis for sure, ...washing
them up creeks and backwaters by the score. Seen the way they have to
dig out the motor cars after the Aceh one? And that did happen on
Tuesday (well, Sunday)



--
Aidan Karley,
Aberdeen, Scotland,
Location: 57=B010'11" N, 02=B008'43" W (sub-tropical Aberdeen),
0=2E021233