Mark writes: >>The fact is that dinosaur fossils are not found at the k-T boundary. One has >>to go 9-10 ft at best, below the boundary to find dinosaur bones in any of >>the beds that contain dinosaur fossils. This represents a substantial period >>of time prior to the impact layer. This is why it is argued against. Matt replies: > This is not entirely true. This is location dependent, for example in New > Mexico (San Juan Basin) you can find them right below (inches below the Ir > anomaly..which is "off the scale")
Well, there you go then. Mark was drawing conclusions on 'facts' or assumptions that weren't correct. >and ABOVE the K-T boundary. Yes, I said > "above" the impact layer. This has been an enigma, but Jim Fassett (USGS) > has provided some compelling evidence (in the form of geochemistry) that the > hadrosaur femur he found, was NOT remowrked from sediments below. He termed > these survivors "Lazarus" dinosaurs and speculated they may have survived > well into the Paleocene. That is interesting. Is this a recent finding? I guess maybe then a few dinosaurs may have survived. But even if they did, that still doesn't hurt the impact theory, and the fossil record clearly shows a massive extinction event at the time of the impact. There were survivors, and the one thing they seem to have in common was there were small in size, substantially smaller than the dinosaurs. Incidently, what exactly is a Lazarus dinosaur? Ron Baalke ______________________________________________ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
