| |
Conclusion
There has been no settlement to the issue so far,
and no clear one is foreseeable. Both sides claim
to hold the majority of proponents in science;
it seems that (greatly over- generalizing) many
paleontologists lean towards the intrinsic side,
while many astronomers and physicists favor the
extrinsic side, and geologists are probably evenly
split between the two.
All of the evidence cited for the extrinsic catastrophist
side is claimed as evidence by the intrinsic gradualists
for their side or against the opposite side- volcanoes
could create the iridium layer, shocked quartz,
soot, and impact ejecta; the makeup of the iridium
layer is not uniform in all areas, so it could
be meaningless; and so on.
The main problem with both hypotheses is the issue
of the selectivity of the mass extinction; some
organisms were wiped out, while others were unaffected.
Can climate change really explain the differential
selectivity of the K-T event? The lack of understanding
of the physiology of dinosaurs makes the issue
more complex; if they were endothermic, why did
they not survive like birds and mammals? If they
were ectothermic, why did small dinosaurs not
survive like small reptiles?
Also, many studies have focused on the extinction
of dinosaurs alone, and have forgotten about the
more substantial marine ecosystem collapse. The
fossil record suggests that some marine reptiles
died out several million years prior to the K-T
boundary.
Other major problems with the issue are that it
is not easy to prove (test) causation (as noted
before), and that most of the ages of the rocks
that different evidence comes from are questionable.
The two main schools of thought are split fairly
evenly among scientists familiar with them. Either
an intrinsic or extrinsic cause for the extinction
would have complex biotic effects on ecosystems
which would look confusing in the fossil record.
There could well have been different, even separate
extinctions in the oceans and on land; the marine
fossil record does support a slightly rapid decline,
while the terrestrial record (especially in North
America) strongly suggests a more gradual decline
(but again, has a fragmentary fossil record).
If an extraterrestrial impact occurred during
a gradual decline, which might explain the seemingly
contradictory evidence. If looking for an opinion
from a paleontologist's point of view, it seems
that the simplest explanation is that the climatic
changes induced by the shifting continents and
the regression of the continental seaways were
the ultimate cause (at least in North America),
but this has not been (and may not ever be) proven.
There is much work to be done, and much value
to this work -- understanding the K-T extinction
would help us to understand mass extinctions in
general, and might provide a glimpse into the
fleeting, evanescent nature of our own mortality.
|
|