K-Pg Extinction... Or Not?

[tyrantqueen]

Sorry if this is the wrong place to post this...but since it is sort of connected with the topic at hand: I'm interested in learning about the extinction of the non-avian dinosaurs, and the different theories that have been suggested for it. Is Extinction: Bad Genes or Bad Luck? a good book to read? Or is there something better?

Thanks

[HD-man]

Amarge, you keep mentioning the latest science and evidence and current thinking but despite all the claims you only reference the book "Dinosaur Hunters" which is 15 years old, perhaps an updated version of the book has been made? Searches on Amazon yield nothing. Actually if anyone knows of a recent book on dinosaur extinction I would appreciate knowing about it, it is a subject I would like to brush up on.

Archibald's Extinction and Radiation: How the Fall of Dinosaurs Led to the Rise of Mammals ( http://www.amazon.com/Extinction-Radiation-Fall-Dinosaurs-Mammals/dp/0801898056/ref=la_B004TLUKH4_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1381679910&sr=1-1 ) is the most recent book I know of about the K/T extinction in particular. I think it's for the specialist, though. For something less technical, I recommend Archibald's "Dinosaur Extinction: Changing Views" ( http://www.bio.sdsu.edu/faculty/archibald/Archibald02DinoExtiViews.pdf ). It's from Scotchmoor et al.'s Dinosaurs: The Science Behind the Stories ( http://www.amazon.com/Dinosaurs-Science-Judith-G-Scotchmoor/dp/0922152624/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1381680792&sr=1-1 ).

P.S. For more info about Scotchmoor et al.'s Dinosaurs: The Science Behind the Stories: http://vertpaleo.org/Publications/Dinosaurs--the-Science-Behind-the-Stories.aspx

There's also MacLeod's The Great Extinctions: What Causes Them and How They Shape Life. The following quote is the synthesis of Chapter 11 ("The End-Cretaceous extinctions").

Quoting MacLeod ( http://www.amazon.com/Great-Extinctions-What-Causes-Shape/dp/1770851879/ref=la_B00E868LSA_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1382751389&sr=1-1 ):

Let me close this discussion by stating there is no question that at least one (possibly more) large impact(s) occurred during latest Maastrichtian time. There is also no question that this (these) impacts would have been devastating for local biotas and may have had short-term (less than 100 years) environmental consequences for the planet. But advocating bolide impact as the only credible cause for the end-Cretaceous extinctions is far too much of an oversimplification for myself and many of my palaeontological colleagues to accept, especially insofar as the mechanisms associated with bolide impact do such a poor job explaining the patterns we see in our palaeontological and geological data. [See Archibald 2010, a letter co-authored by 28 palaeontologists from across the palaeontological subdisciplines outlining opposition to the K-Pg impact-extinction scenario and written in response to an article published by Schulte 2010 supporting this model, but coauthored by only 12 palaeontologists the overwhelming majority of whom were microfossil specialists.] Based on a consideration of all the evidence presented above I find the causal framework that accounts for the greatest proportion of evidence is one that acknowledges the totality of physical events that are known to have occurred at the end of the Cretaceous: a scenario that invokes sea-level change, Deccan volcanism and the Chicxulub impact as all playing roles in precipitating the end-Cretaceous extinction event with terrestrial extinction deriving primarily from habitat fragmentation resulting from the end-Maastrichtian sea-level regression and marine extinctions driven primarily by a short-term collapse in primary productivity.

[tyrantqueen]

Amarge, you keep mentioning the latest science and evidence and current thinking but despite all the claims you only reference the book "Dinosaur Hunters" which is 15 years old, perhaps an updated version of the book has been made? Searches on Amazon yield nothing. Actually if anyone knows of a recent book on dinosaur extinction I would appreciate knowing about it, it is a subject I would like to brush up on.

Archibald's Extinction and Radiation: How the Fall of Dinosaurs Led to the Rise of Mammals ( http://www.amazon.com/Extinction-Radiation-Fall-Dinosaurs-Mammals/dp/0801898056/ref=la_B004TLUKH4_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1381679910&sr=1-1 ) is the most recent book I know of about the K/T extinction in particular. I think it's for the specialist, though. For something less technical, I recommend Archibald's "Dinosaur Extinction: Changing Views" ( http://www.bio.sdsu.edu/faculty/archibald/Archibald02DinoExtiViews.pdf ). It's from Scotchmoor et al.'s Dinosaurs: The Science Behind the Stories ( http://www.amazon.com/Dinosaurs-Science-Judith-G-Scotchmoor/dp/0922152624/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1381680792&sr=1-1 ).

P.S. For more info about Scotchmoor et al.'s Dinosaurs: The Science Behind the Stories: http://vertpaleo.org/Publications/Dinosaurs--the-Science-Behind-the-Stories.aspx

There's also MacLeod's The Great Extinctions: What Causes Them and How They Shape Life. The following quote is the synthesis of Chapter 11 ("The End-Cretaceous extinctions").

Quoting MacLeod ( http://www.amazon.com/Great-Extinctions-What-Causes-Shape/dp/1770851879/ref=la_B00E868LSA_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1382751389&sr=1-1 ):

Let me close this discussion by stating there is no question that at least one (possibly more) large impact(s) occurred during latest Maastrichtian time. There is also no question that this (these) impacts would have been devastating for local biotas and may have had short-term (less than 100 years) environmental consequences for the planet. But advocating bolide impact as the only credible cause for the end-Cretaceous extinctions is far too much of an oversimplification for myself and many of my palaeontological colleagues to accept, especially insofar as the mechanisms associated with bolide impact do such a poor job explaining the patterns we see in our palaeontological and geological data. [See Archibald 2010, a letter co-authored by 28 palaeontologists from across the palaeontological subdisciplines outlining opposition to the K-Pg impact-extinction scenario and written in response to an article published by Schulte 2010 supporting this model, but coauthored by only 12 palaeontologists the overwhelming majority of whom were microfossil specialists.] Based on a consideration of all the evidence presented above I find the causal framework that accounts for the greatest proportion of evidence is one that acknowledges the totality of physical events that are known to have occurred at the end of the Cretaceous: a scenario that invokes sea-level change, Deccan volcanism and the Chicxulub impact as all playing roles in precipitating the end-Cretaceous extinction event with terrestrial extinction deriving primarily from habitat fragmentation resulting from the end-Maastrichtian sea-level regression and marine extinctions driven primarily by a short-term collapse in primary productivity.

Thanks, this is super helpful.

[Simon]

*AHEM*

In other news,

The Capitol of China is still PEKING,

That little island that the US owns in the Carribean is still PORTO Rico,

The National Pastime of America is still "BASE BALL".

..... and the extinction of the dinosaurs still occurred at the "K-T" boundary.

Brownie points to anyone who can guess what point I am making ....   

[tyrantqueen]

*AHEM*

In other news,

The Capitol of China is still PEKING,

That little island that the US owns in the Carribean is still PORTO Rico,

The National Pastime of America is still "BASE BALL".

..... and the extinction of the dinosaurs still occurred at the "K-T" boundary.

Brownie points to anyone who can guess what point I am making ....   

Huh...thought the capital of China was Beijing.

[Simon]

Any guesses as to what I was railing against above?

Ah, what-the-heck:  I was complaining as I am want to about completely unnecessary changes in the spelling of names, etc.  that occur periodically because some busybody has nothing better to do....

T-queen:  In 1975 the New York Times started calling the capital of China "Beijing" instead of the traditional "Peking" because this spelling was - supposedly - closer to the Chinese pronunciation.

The punch-line:  WTH did it matter - because English is NOT a phonetic language to begin with!!!!!!!!!!

P.S.  This K-T thing/name change just FRIES me.  Probably because its so recent.

Rest assured, so long as there is a breath left in my body, "K-T" will remain a viable term.  As will "Peking".

(Gets off soapbox)   

[tyrantqueen]

Any guesses as to what I was railing against above?

You're stating how obvious it is that the dinosaurs went extinct at the KT boundary?

Whatever the case may be, I still think it's interesting to read about. That's why I was asking for additional reading on the subject. I like reading the alternate hypotheses (the Deccan traps for example), even if it is only to see them debunked or discarded.

[Simon]

Good God.   

I just realized after reading page 1 of this thread that I made these same points exactly ONE YEAR AGO (as well as expressing my views on the actual subject of the extinction.)

Well, it does prove two things:

#1 - Advancing age does tend to burn memory cells and/or
#2 - The same things still 'push my buttons' as always ... *yuck*

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Isn't it Puerto Rico and Baseball?

[tyrantqueen]

Isn't it Puerto Rico and Baseball?

It is.

The use of Peking instead of Beijing just makes me think of Peking ducks:

[tyrantqueen]

Also, I know this is off topic, but it's really weird to look at Donald Duck and realise he is a dinosaur

[Simon]

Isn't it Puerto Rico and Baseball?

*sigh*  yes, I am afraid so.  *chuckle*

Bet not too many know that the American game was once called "Base Ball" .... 

[tyrantqueen]

Isn't it Puerto Rico and Baseball?

*sigh*  yes, I am afraid so.  *chuckle*

Bet not too many know that the American game was once called "Base Ball" .... 

And did you know that baseball is really just a form of rounders (probably some cricket in there too) which the English colonists brought to America?

Rounders is a girl's ball game btw. We still play it at schools over here. We don't even use a bat to hit the ball, we have to use our bare hands

[HD-man]

Thanks, this is super helpful.

Anytime.

Ah, what-the-heck:  I was complaining as I am want to about completely unnecessary changes in the spelling of names, etc.  that occur periodically because some busybody has nothing better to do....

T-queen:  In 1975 the New York Times started calling the capital of China "Beijing" instead of the traditional "Peking" because this spelling was - supposedly - closer to the Chinese pronunciation.

The punch-line:  WTH did it matter - because English is NOT a phonetic language to begin with!!!!!!!!!!

P.S.  This K-T thing/name change just FRIES me.  Probably because its so recent.

Rest assured, so long as there is a breath left in my body, "K-T" will remain a viable term.  As will "Peking".

At least some good paleontologists still use the term "KT" (E.g. Witton in Pterosaurs: Natural History, Evolution, Anatomy), which is good enough for me.