Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Dinosaurs Died Within Hours of Asteroid Impact, says New Study

CowboyNeal posted more than 10 years ago | from the sudden-climate-changes dept.

Space 862

colonist writes "SPACE.com reports that most dinosaurs were incinerated within hours by the 'heat pulse' of an asteroid impact 65 million years ago. The study 'Survival in the first hours of the Cenozoic' presents a scenario where the only survivors were underground or were underwater in swamps or oceans. All unprotected creatures were 'baked by the equivalent of a global oven set on broil.'"

cancel ×

862 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272142)

posted minutes after

Re:First post (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272147)

Maybe because no one gives a shit how fast they died?

Re:First post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272172)

quite possible

hi from GNAA (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272146)

anus cheese

Dino-burgers (5, Funny)

nightsweat (604367) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272149)

An appropriate post for the Memorial Day weekend. Imagine the world's largest barbeque.

Re:Dino-burgers (2, Funny)

RuneB (170521) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272278)

Rare, medium, or well-done?

Re:Dino-burgers (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272311)

Mmm, broiled dino-burgers. Dem's good eatin'!

Plus they're Atkins-approved!

Broil? (4, Funny)

turgid (580780) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272152)

For us ignorant Brits, wthat's that in Gas Mark?

Re:Broil? (3, Informative)

sense_net (755855) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272169)

Broil is when you put the food directly under the flames.

2 Marks from.... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272185)

a Gay Niggers' nutsack..

What they don't teach imperial there?? but we're supposed to learn metric??

It works both ways (no, not your butt)..

Re:2 Marks from.... (4, Informative)

turgid (580780) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272246)

What they don't teach imperial there?? but we're supposed to learn metric??

Gas Mark is a Fahrenheit scale.

From this chart [godecookery.com] it is possible to infer that Gas Mark 0 is 250 Fahrenheit, and each increment of 1 Gas Mark is equal to 25 Fahrenheit degrees.

So at what Gas Mark setting did they bake/flambe the dinosaurs?

As an exercise for the interested reader, using spectroscopic data, estimate the surface temperature of Zubenelgenubi in Gas Mark.

Re:2 Marks from.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272347)

According to this this [uiuc.edu] while the brighter (Alpha-2) is a much warmer white class A star with a temperature of 8500 Kelvin.
Which google says it's about 123.9 gas mark.

Why do you ask?

Re:2 Marks from.... (1)

turgid (580780) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272369)

Why do you ask?

Google wouldn't do the conversion for me :-(

Re:2 Marks from.... (4, Funny)

Rorschach1 (174480) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272363)

Zubenelgenubi is a double star. Which one do you mean? Assuming you're talking about the hotter one, Alpha-2, that'd be about 583.

Re:2 Marks from.... (1)

turgid (580780) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272389)

Of course it is. Silly me. That's what you get for drinking beer.

Re:Broil? (2, Interesting)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272240)

Isn't

"'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimbol in the wabe."


British [jabberwocky.com] ? Broil is what you do at 4 o'clock in the afternoon [eosdev.com] .

Re:Broil? (1)

hattig (47930) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272264)

Broil means Roast as far as I have been able to work out.

Yeah, it took me a long time to work that out.

Broil is a horrible word, brings up images of boiling meat and then just serving it.

Re:Broil? (1)

Sylver Dragon (445237) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272392)

Not certain on the exact answer, being an ignorant American, this is the first I have ever heard of Gas Mark. Though on all stoves I have worked with, it is the highest setting possible, and is very hot. I can broil a steak in 5 to 10 minutes, depending on thickness. Basically, its the American stove equivilent of afterburner.

Correct me if I'm wrong. (1, Insightful)

scooby111 (714417) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272157)

Isn't the whole "asteroid impact" scenario a theory? Doesn't that make this new theory a theory based on a theory?

We're getting kind of thin here.

Re:Correct me if I'm wrong. (5, Insightful)

another_henry (570767) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272174)

Actually it's well accepted as by far the most likely candidate for what happened. By the way, other theories include the theory of gravity, relativity theory etc... all pretty much proven, ask Hiroshima about E=mc^2 if you don't believe that one :P

You know, thats really not funny. [NT] (1)

molo (94384) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272259)

NT = no text

-molo

Re:You know, thats really not funny. [NT] (1)

another_henry (570767) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272269)

Not really intended to be.. I shouldn't have put that smily in there. War is bad.

Re:You know, thats really not funny. [NT] (4, Insightful)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272318)

Funny, no. But sometimes that kind of dramatic analogy is necessary to get the point across to people who don't understand what the word "theory" means in a scientific context.

I tend to personalize it a bit: "If you believe that ___* is 'just a theory,' be aware that gravity is 'just a theory' as well. I invite you to try jumping off a skyscraper because, surely, nothing that is 'just a theory' can hurt you."

*___ is almost always evolution, of course, though sometimes it's relativity.

Re:Correct me if I'm wrong. (0, Troll)

DuckWing (19575) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272382)

Well accepted doesn't make it correct. It's still a theory, and one (I might add) that cannot be proven, unlike a few others you've quoted.

Being a creationist, I still subscribe to the world wide flood as the reason dinosaurs are extinct. This isn'a theory, but it *is* a matter of faith, and that's what I believe.

Re:Correct me if I'm wrong. (1)

Hopelessness (742112) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272176)

Thanks. Now we have a theory about a theory about a theory, assuming we even exist in the first place.

Re:Correct me if I'm wrong. (1)

sense_net (755855) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272187)

You are correct in saying that the mass extinction in question is a theory, but the evidence to back this theory is very substantial.

substantial with a lot of holes (1)

jomas1 (696853) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272250)

The asteroid mass extinction theory is substantial but it has always had a lot of holes. The original idea that the sun was blocked out long enough for plants to die did not explain how bees and other animals that depend on plants survived. Now we need to know how bees survived in an oven without food for years?

substantial with a lot of holes-Leftovers. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272386)

"Now we need to know how bees survived in an oven without food for years?"

Million year-old barbeque.

Re:Correct me if I'm wrong. (5, Interesting)

Kenja (541830) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272210)

Everything in science is a theory. The "asteroid impact" idea has a lot to back it up however since there are some realy big craters on this ball of mud we call home. Check out the 170 km one at the Yucatan Peninsula [solarviews.com] .

Re:Correct me if I'm wrong. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272380)

well...

rumaging in the back of my mind was an age old argument between the definitions of theroy, hypothesis, and conjecture. A quick look at Wikipedia states the following:

Often the statement "Well, it's just a theory," is used to dismiss controversial theories such as evolution, but this is largely due to confusion between the words theory and hypothesis. In science, a body of descriptions of knowledge is usually only called a theory once it has a firm empirical basis, i.e. it

is consistent with pre-existing theory to the extent that the pre-existing theory was experimentally verified, though it will often show pre-existing theory to be wrong in an exact sense,
is supported by many strands of evidence rather than a single foundation, ensuring that it probably is a good approximation if not totally correct,
has survived many critical real world tests that could have proven it false,
makes predictions that might someday be used to disprove the theory, and
is the best known explanation, in the sense of Occam's Razor, of the infinite variety of alternative explanations for the same data.

This is true of such established theories as evolution, special and general relativity, quantum mechanics (with minimal interpretation), plate tectonics, etc.

Re:Correct me if I'm wrong. (2, Insightful)

bstadil (7110) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272242)

All science is to some extend bassed on layers of theory, however each new theory, if correctly done, explains all the known facts but often includes elements of predictions along the lines of "If this theory is correct we will expect to see X".

Now we can go looking for X and if we find it and the prediction was somewhat unexpected before the theory was proposed it is a strong indication of its validity.

Case in points Einsteins prediction of light being bend by high gravity object that was indeed confirmed.

Same here if we do find a a lot of different Dinosaurs in the same narrow strada around the world it make the theory more likely.

Re:Correct me if I'm wrong. (1)

linzeal (197905) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272287)

If you want to know more about the philosophy of science check out the crown prince of scientific philosophy's greatest work [amazon.com] on the subject.

Re:Correct me if I'm wrong. (4, Interesting)

Przepla (637674) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272248)

Well, scientifical theories are different from lay persons theories.
Taken from: Wikipedia article on theory [wikipedia.org] :
In common usage a theory is often viewed as little more than a guess or a hypothesis. But in science and generally in academic usage, a theory is much more than that. A theory is an established paradigm that explains all or many of the data we have and offers valid predictions that can be tested. In science, a theory can never be proven true, because we can never assume we know all there is to know. Instead, theories remain standing until they are disproven, at which point they are thrown out altogether or modified slightly.

So, proven for 99.9999% theory of gravity is still a theory.

Re:Correct me if I'm wrong. (2, Informative)

f97tosc (578893) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272255)

Isn't the whole "asteroid impact" scenario a theory? Doesn't that make this new theory a theory based on a theory?

It is widely accepted that an asteroid fell down around 65 million years ago and that this approximately coincided with the end of the dinosaurs (except for birds). You will not find a single serious scientist who disagrees with this.

What is more controversial is how quickly they died off and if it was only because of the asteroid or if other factors were involved as well. This latest claim is that it was quick; we will see how well it will be received in the scientific community.

Tor

Re:Correct me if I'm wrong. (1)

Overdrive_SS (243510) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272341)

Widely accepted maybe, that still doesn't make it true. And I am sure you can find many more than one serious scientist that will disagree with it.

"Alvarez Hypothesis" (5, Informative)

Hamster Lover (558288) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272298)

"Alvarez Hypothesis" is the term used to describe the idea that dinosaurs died as a result of a catastrophic asteroid impact. I do not believe that the hypothesis has attained the status of theory, however. The main evidence for such a hypothesis seems to come from the observation of geologist Walter Alvarez of a significant layer of Iridium on the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary (KT boundary), due to the fact that Iridium is a very rare element on Earth but found in abundance in asteroids and meteorites. This link [priweb.org] has some more information along with Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] .

The Violation of Rob Malda (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272160)

Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda stepped off the bus and was led into the yard of the Main
State Correctional Institute. He had been given ten years for participating in
a stock fraud. Five with good behavior. Years spent basking in the glow of a
CRT had been hard on him. His body was frail, his skin pallid. He knew he could
never make it through ten years in the general population with his virginity
intact. He had to get into solitary.

As soon as the burly guard unshackled him he made his move. Exhaling a feminine
"hmmph" he weakly slapped the guard. He was quickly taken to the ground,
receiving a swift kick to the ribs before being restrained. As he was dragged
to the solitary confinement cell he felt nothing but relief. "At least in
solitary," he thought "I'll be safe." Unfortunately for Rob he had picked the
wrong guard to mess with.

The next few days were uneventful. The time in his cell he spent evenly between
sleeping, reading a "Perl for Dummies" book he had gotten from the book cart,
and masturbating furiously. His self-flagellation was interrupted on the fourth
day. The burly guard he had attacked earlier stepped into his cell. The gleam
in the guards eye and the mean grin on his face made Rob's pecker quickly
shrivel in his hand. "You fucked with the wrong man when you fucked with
Michael Simms," said the guard. "The inmates here call me The Asshole for a
reason. Now come with me, punk."

The guard led him down the hall to one of several empty shower stalls. He
roughly threw Rob in the stall and locked the door. Rob was petrified. His mind
raced as he imagined the myriad of different tortures that could be in store
for him. His worst fears were confirmed when the guard returned. In his hands
were a short black dress, black stilleto heels, and a curly blonde wig. "Strip
down and put this on, bitch." Rob did as instructed and was pleased to notice
that the dress fit well and the heels gave him a nice slimming effect. The
burly guard admired the drag queen. "The GNAA is gonna love you!"

The guard left the shower stall, only to return minutes later. He opened the
door and led 20 large black men into the stall. "Rob, meet the Gay Nigger
Association of America. GNAA, meet Rob. I'm sure you all will get along fine."
With that the guard slammed the shower door closed and walked away laughing.

The men approached Rob, backing him into a corner. The apparent leader stepped
forward. "No matter what I'm gonna fuck that purdy lil' ass of yours. Now I can
fuck it dry or you can lube it up for me." Rob knew he had no choice. He
kneeled in front of the leader, who began to slap his face with his 10 black
inches. Puss from syphilictic sores quickly covered Rob's cheeks. When the
leader was sufficiently aroused he placed his throbbing cock up to Rob's lips.
As soon as Rob opened his mouth the leader violently shoved his manhood to the
back of Rob's throat and exclaimed "Swallow my shit you cracker bitch!" Rob
gagged as he was violently face fucked.

Just when he was about to pass out the leader pulled out, turned him around and
shoved his cock into Rob's ass. Rob began to scream in agony but his cries were
quickly muffled by one of the other gang member's cocks. They rode him like
that for the better part of an hour. When one man finished another quickly took
his place. Just as Rob was getting used to the throbbing pain in his anus the
men stopped. One man lay down on the floor and Rob was told to get on top of
him and take his dick inside him. Exhausted and humiliated, Rob had no will
left to fight. As soon as he inserted the penis another man came up behind him
and began to force his cock into Rob's already filled anus. Again his screams
of agony were muffled, this time by a smelly black anus.

For another hour he was violated in this way. When the men were finished with
him he couldn't walk and his mouth was filled with dingleberries and ass hairs.
Before they all left the leader had some parting words for Rob: "Thanks for
that sweet piece of ass, punk. We'll see you again tomorrow. Oh by the way, we
all have AIDS." It was going to be a long ten years for Rob.

RTFA (5, Funny)

lexsco (594799) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272161)

I'd like to RTFA, I really would !

Why isnt this article SPAM (4, Insightful)

robogun (466062) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272323)

Someone post the article so we can make intelligent comments on it.
To be honest, I have no idea why an article like this is not considered spam, if we have to pay to read it.

too bad for the dinosaurs (5, Funny)

chaos421 (531619) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272162)

it's too bad their all-star oil drilling team didn't quite make it in time...

That's what they get (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272180)

For sending a Brontosaurus to do a T-Rex's job.

Dinosaurs = Micro$oft (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272164)

Dinosaurs would have lived longer if they'd been able to run a Linux cluster on their mini-ITX board.

Long live Google!

Pot Smokers Rejoice! (4, Funny)

Goalie_Ca (584234) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272166)

At least the dinosaurs went out baked!

mmmmm...... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272171)

mmmmm...... bbq [/drool]

Yummy (1)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272175)

Yummy.... Cooked Dinosaur, our ancestors must have been feasting!

Survival (5, Funny)

jimmcq (88033) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272188)

Alright, so what do I need to survive the next major asteroid impact of this magnatude? It sounds like most buildings won't be sufficient protection.

Do I need a cave to hide in? Should I go to a large body of water?

Re:Survival (1)

Exiler (589908) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272267)

From the article it would seem you need a swamp or a cave.

Re:Survival (1)

turgid (580780) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272316)

Move to the Moon or Mars of course.

Wait a minute...

Re:Survival (1)

Kenja (541830) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272342)

I'll sell ya some ELE (extinction level event) insurance for just 1000$ a year! If life gets wiped off the planet you get your money back!

Re:Survival (1)

koi88 (640490) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272390)

Put a paper bag over your head.

What the... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272193)

So what happened with earthworms, seagulls, and bears, and crocodiles, and.... humans and chimps and monkeys? How did the sabertooth tiger walk the earth and the tiger still does? Close relations between now-extinct animals that walked with the dinosaurs and us still exist.

I'd like to say the great flood drowned all the dinosaurs.

Re:What the... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272247)

I'd like to say the great flood drowned all the dinosaurs.

I'd like to sterilize you and prevent you from ever having contact with children. Fucking theists.

Mmmm, Broiled Dino (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272198)

The Emeril Lagassaurus Rex would have added some prehistoric garlic when he saw the meteor coming...then BAM!!!! Another notch!

I'd say some died instantly (5, Funny)

scdeimos (632778) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272209)

"Hey, Lou, what the F is " *SPLAT*

The Cock Roach (1)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272211)

Only the underwater subterranean cock roach survived.

Temperature and sex ratio (1)

Thinkit4 (745166) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272215)

The theory that temperature mucked with sex ratio casuing too few females seems more plausible. Human ratio (which is 106 men per 100 women--that's why only boys have to go stag) is not influenced by temperature.

Re:Temperature and sex ratio (1, Insightful)

qkw (755948) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272257)

so the increase in temperature caused all the female dinosaurs to believe they were menopausal and having hot flushes, and therefore forbade the males from interfering with them?

sounds like a neat little theory

Interstellar catastrophic source no longer needed (0, Offtopic)

Anubis333 (103791) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272222)

I find this funny. I always love hearing about catastrpophic asteroids and things. But the US has 10,000 nuculear warheads, enough to 'overkill' the worlds pupulation 12x. For those of you not in the military, this means that if the bodies of the dead were to get up again, we could kill them all 12 more times. We humans are capable of creating a much larger catastrophe than our often theoretical cousins in space; and it's saddening.

Re:Interstellar catastrophic source no longer need (0)

glwtta (532858) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272241)

Hm, I don't think the dinosaurs overkilled themselves with nuclear weapons.

Re:Interstellar catastrophic source no longer need (1)

Wakkow (52585) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272293)

"this means that if the bodies of the dead were to get up again, we could kill them all 12 more times."

Given enough fallout, we might see that happen!

Re:Interstellar catastrophic source no longer need (1)

jebell (567579) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272296)

I bet there are a lot more than 12 "planet-killer" asteroids out there. Heck, I bet there are more than 12 of those in orbit around our sun.

So what's your point?

Detroy the world fallacy (4, Insightful)

kingmundi (54911) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272309)

1. Do the Americans really have enough nukes to destroy the world ten times over?

This one I hear a lot. First of all, despite what you may have heard, really the majority of the energy of a nuclear explosion turns into heat and blast immediately, NOT radiation. The only exception to this is the so-called Neutron bomb, designed specifically with radiation (more specifically fast neutrons and gamma rays) in mind. But realistically, although the Americans have built approximately 70,000 warheads of almost 70 different types, they now possess a stockpile of around 9600 warheads. Surprising as it may sound, this is NOT enough to 'destroy' the world. Even hitting every city in the world with everything in every country's arsenal would not be able to 'destroy' the world. The world is still a
BIG place. Keep in mind the Russians have around the same numbers of warheads.

Re:Interstellar catastrophic source no longer need (1)

Bottlemaster (449635) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272314)

You don't think space has 11 more asteroids just like the one that killed the dinosaurs?
I think it does.

Re:Interstellar catastrophic source no longer need (1)

Grrr (16449) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272319)

I find this funny.

B-but your post wasn't at all amusing... it was just completely offtopic.
("Uuhhh, speaking of asteroids - I just picked up this great collection of old Atari games on sale at the store...")

I did appreciate "pupulation", though, and wish I had mod points today 'cause that's got potential for being a nifty and useful word.

<grrr>

Why is that sad? (3, Insightful)

Kelmenson (592104) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272328)

For those of you not in the military, this means that if the bodies of the dead were to get up again, we could kill them all 12 more times. We humans are capable of creating a much larger catastrophe than our often theoretical cousins in space; and it's saddening.

The fact that man has the power to potentially do something shouldn't make you sad. It should actually make you proud. Now, if man would actually do it, that would be sad.

Man can kill man, but until they do, there is nothing to be sad about.

Re:Interstellar catastrophic source no longer need (1)

Rakishi (759894) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272330)

Don't spread myths, last I checked all humans do not live in one giant city.
http://www.beyondweird.com/nuclearwar/s73p912.htm

I dispute the figures (1)

Sangloth (664575) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272394)

Not too long ago, I think 2002, we signed the SORT treaty with Russia, where we limited ourselves to 2,200 nuclear warheads.

I find this type of alarmism annoying...nuclear weapons have only been used as weapons twice in all of human history. If we survived the Cold War, I find it highly unlikely that we'd blow ourselves up now. Nuclear terrorism may be a valid threat, but nuclear war is a thing of the past.

Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.

All the dinosaurs? (2, Insightful)

farmhick (465391) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272225)

Not having read the article, it's hard to see how one meteorite could bake animals on the other side of the world. After all, this impact wasn't during the Pangea time, when all of the land mass of the earth was joined in one great continent.

If this is true wouldn't there be a large carbon layer evenly distributed over the earth's surface from that time?

Not really. (2, Informative)

aepervius (535155) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272345)

Think about it. The rest are not carbon, if there is complete incineration, then only some non carbonic element are left (Ca, OS, etc...). If the frying is not complete, the bacteria in the body then start their work and eat up the corpse. As for baking on the other side of the world, it really depend on the energy of the impact. It heat up the atmosphere which then in a heat wave travel around the globe. Whether the heat wave is enough is another question which the article seems to answer : yes.

But as the article point out, this theory does not explain the water extinction of the animals.

Article title (4, Informative)

SageMadHatter (546701) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272226)

Dinosaurs Fried Within Hours of Cosmic Collision, Study Concludes

According to the article, the dinos were cooked by super-heated air. That would mean they were broiled, not fried :)

I read the article... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272227)

Another wild hypothesis without a shred of verifyable evidence.

"We know what happened thousands of years ago although no one was there to photograph or document it."

This article is almost as much of a joke as someone finding a chip of a bone off of a dinosaur and recreating the whole dinosaur, flesh and all.

These "scientists" are idiots.

Facts? (3, Insightful)

Racer X (140445) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272230)

This article contains the following quote:


"There's no question over whether an asteroid hit. The roughly 6-mile-wide (10-kilometer) space rock carved out the Chicxulub crater off Mexico's Yucatan Penninsula."


But fairly recently there was another article posted on slashdot, about the alleged impact having occurred in (what is now) Australia. (check, e.g., here http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4969840/ for a similar story.)

so what is the consensus *really*, in the scientific community? or is there just none?

Re:Facts? (5, Informative)

WhytTiger (595699) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272254)

the consensus is: The asteroid that killed off the dinosaurs is the one that hit in the Yucatan Penninsula The asteroid that killed off 99.9% of life before the dinosaurs existed was the one that hit near austrailia

Re:Facts? (1)

dmaxwell (43234) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272284)

That something Really Big hit the Yucatan is beyond dispute. Whether or not is was a mass extinction event may well be debatable.

Re:Facts? (1)

f97tosc (578893) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272324)

But fairly recently there was another article (...) so what is the consensus *really*, in the scientific community? or is there just none?

The other impact you are talking about was $250 million years ago, during another mass extinction. That is a new claim and still a bit controversial.

The 65 million year ago hit _is_ widely accepted, although it is somewhat controversial exactly what role it played in the mass extinction.

Tor

Re:Facts? (5, Informative)

MoralHazard (447833) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272334)

I think you're talking about two different mass die-offs. The Yucatan crater theoretically caused the Late Cretaceous die-off (approx. 65 million years ago) that made the dinosaurs go extincet. The Australian crater has been linked to the Late Permian die-off, which happened about 250 million years ago.

So, Racer X, the scientific community would appear to have two consensuses (consenses? WTF?), one on each of the two issues.

Mass extinctions are a fairly regular event in the Earth's geologic history. There are at least two more, besides the Permian and Cretaceous catastrophes, with which I'm familiar. Most people only get taught about the Cretaceous one in high school, though, so they never hear about the others.

Kind of like the Ice Age. Up until I was 16, I only thought there was one. Turns out there were a shitload of them.

Obligatory Jurassic Park Quote (1, Offtopic)

Lorenzo de Medici (774505) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272237)

Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum):Don't you see the danger, John, in what you're doing here? Genetic force is the most awesome power the planet's ever seen, but you wield it like a kid that found his dad's gun. I'll tell you the problem with the scientific power that you're using here. It didn't acquire any discipline to attain it. You read what others have done and you took the next step. You didn't earn the knowledge for yourself so therefore you don't take any responsibility for it. You stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as you could and before you even knew it you had it. You patented it and packaged it and slapped it on a plastic lunch box, and now your selling it! You wanna sell it! Well, your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could they didn't stop if they should. No, hold on John, this is not an animal wiped out by deforestation or the building of a dam. Dinosaurs had their shot and nature selected them for extinction.

Pretty scary if nature selected them in a matter of seconds. Too bad the vastly hyper-intelligent dinosaur civilization's NASA counterpart didn't have a Near-Earth Object Program [nasa.gov] .

Re:Obligatory Jurassic Park Quote (1)

Lorenzo de Medici (774505) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272270)

Sorry about dressing up the link in so much Jurassic Park. Really, though, NASA's Near-Earth Object Program [nasa.gov] website is highly informative, and a great read.

Re:Obligatory Jurassic Park Quote (1)

Grrr (16449) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272275)


Alright! Thanks - I was sitting in a meeting today, trying to remember the heart of this quote.

Spiffericity.

<grrr>

Re:Obligatory Jurassic Park Quote (1)

Lorenzo de Medici (774505) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272338)

I cheated. Though it really is a great dramatic monologue [whysanity.net] , and I try to use it for auditions whenever they're looking for the super-intelligent scientist type. The Ian Malcolm character is a wealth of quoteable quotes. Kudos to Michael Crichton.

Anybody hear that? It's an... It's an impact tremor, that's what it is... I'm fairly alarmed here.

Dr. Ian Malcolm: There. Look at this. See? See? I'm right again. Nobody could've predicted that Dr. Grant would suddenly, suddenly jump out of a moving vehicle.

Dr. Ellie Sattler: Alan? Alan!

[Jumps out of the vehicle]

Dr. Ian Malcolm: There's, another example. See, here I'm now by myself, uh, er, talking to myself. That's, that's chaos theory.

Dr. Ian Malcolm: There. Look at this. See? See? I'm right again. Nobody could've predicted that Dr. Grant would suddenly, suddenly jump out of a moving vehicle. Dr. Ellie Sattler: Alan? Alan! [Jumps out of the vehicle] Dr. Ian Malcolm: There's, another example. See, here I'm now by myself, uh, er, talking to myself. That's, that's chaos theory.

. . . and best of all . . .

God help us; we're in the hands of engineers.

Re:Obligatory Jurassic Park Quote (1)

dmh20002 (637819) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272297)

You are totally correct. The Malcolm statement is completely backwards and I remember being peeved when I first heard it on the movie. Species being wiped out by deforestation or a dam IS a matter of natural selection in the sense of losing out to a competitive species. Being wiped out by an asteroid impact is not.

Re:Obligatory Jurassic Park Quote (3, Interesting)

toddestan (632714) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272336)

Too bad the vastly hyper-intelligent dinosaur civilization's NASA counterpart didn't have a Near-Earth Object Program.

What good would it of done, if they couldn't do anything about it? If we found a dinosaur-killer heading our way, could we stop it?

Could we do anything about it? (1)

Lorenzo de Medici (774505) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272365)

Bruce Willis [imdb.com] says, "Yes."

Re:Obligatory Jurassic Park Quote (1)

WinterSolstice (223271) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272397)

(sarcasm)
Considering only one species of "dinosaur" is still alive, that would be a very small asteroid... I bet we could :)

Now if it were a large iron core asteroid like the the ones that caused the two huge craters in the western hemisphere... well, I would hope X prize works really, really well.

-WS

Cooking cycle on my... (1, Redundant)

beatleadam (102396) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272256)

...Microwave.
...dinosaurs were incinerated within hours by the 'heat pulse'... All unprotected creatures were 'baked by the equivalent of a global oven set on broil...
Well...Kinda hard to "broil" per se but Bon Appetit!

kill all the plants too (5, Insightful)

slothman32 (629113) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272261)

Of course I didn't read the article, as I don't subscribe and am lazy, but wouldn't the heat kill all the plants too? And I thought there were "many" survivors. Mostly small animals, besides plants and lower life forms. And how could 1 impact effect the entire planet with such a high amount of heat? Wouldn't that metemorph rocks as well? Or even react the atmosphere?

Re:kill all the plants too (4, Insightful)

DragonMagic (170846) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272322)

Plus, if it were that powerful to bake animals, would not the water temperature rise, and the air bake the animals which did survive, and destroy the birds as they're not too good about going underwater, and melt the ice at the caps, and...

Sorry, but this theory doesn't even sound plausible. What could they base it on? (Sorry, article /.'ed)

Read this Post like Dr. Evil! (1, Funny)

beatleadam (102396) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272283)

Here...Try this...Pinky to Mouth everyone :-)

"dinosaurs were incinerated within hours by the 'heat pulse' of the Frickin' Laser Beam!

The Truth is so much cooler than Fiction (5, Interesting)

GOD_ALMIGHTY (17678) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272289)

The majority of the dinosaurs were instantly fried, like in a nuke blast that wrapped around the globe. I haven't seen a movie lately, that had those kind of cool FX. How about you?

Think about to all the meteor's crashing into earth movies there are, now think about all the FX. Nothing as impressive as ALL THE DINOSAURS getting fried as a heat wave travelled around the globe.

Why can't Hollywood just pay attention to history and science. It's way cooler than the drek they come up with.

But seriously folks, just think of all the Brontoburgers. I bet Fred and Barney boiled off the surface still salivating at the endless plains of dino ribs.

But so much survived (5, Interesting)

DeadBugs (546475) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272291)

So many things survived from that time other than the Dinosaurs. Large trees, many forms of reptiles and mammals that are virtually the same (based on fossil records) to this day.

Not too mention that the fossil records for Dinosaurs don't stop on 1 day.

It seems that the Doomsday theory gets more headlines than other theories suggesting, disease and climate change (a much slower, more boring process) were the cause. Even though the damage of a meteor strike would have been far more devastating and left the planet set back near square one as far as life.

If the earth was baked and then the sun was blocked by smoke and ash, how come so much survived?

*Note IANAS (I Am Not A Scientist), just wondering.

The important question... (3, Interesting)

NoMoreNicksLeft (516230) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272299)

Is how they ever managed to live in the first place. The strength of muscles is a function of the area of their cross-section. It increases only roughly at a rate of the square of its size. Weight goes up as a cube of its size. Things get heavier much faster than they get stronger.

And just how much stronger could dino muscles have been than modern mammalian muscle? 140% stronger, 170%? That's really stretching it, and it still isn't nearly enough.

Land animals probably can't be much bigger than an elephant.

And no, I'm not a christian scientist. I don't think it's a conspiract, the bones are there, and they show how big the things must have been. I'd just like answers (prefereably those that don't have anything to do with superstitious bible crap).

Re:The important question... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272356)

I'm no scientist, but I do own a 3.5 foot iguana, and she is FAR stronger than any cat or dog of equal or greater size that I have ever owned or played with.

So frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if lizard muscle was way stronger than mammal muscle.

Modoc

Re:The important question... (4, Insightful)

jebell (567579) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272357)

And just how much stronger could dino muscles have been than modern mammalian muscle? 140% stronger, 170%? That's really stretching it, and it still isn't nearly enough.

I think you're underestimating how strong many animals really are. Our close relatives, the chimpanzees, are considerably stronger, pound-for-pound, than we are. Reptiles are also noted for being very muscular, even if they don't have much stamina.

Re:The important question... (5, Funny)

0xffffffff (161827) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272385)

There is a theory that the earth was lighter back then, which let heavier animals thrive. It's an interesting theory - it also says that the Pangea continent covered the whole earth (not just one side) since the earth was ~40% of it's current size, and that it grew by collecting space debris over time. Someone should do the math concerning muscle efficiency and this ancient mass of the earth and see if it works out.

Needless to say (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272305)


That the asteroid ruined it for those dinosaurs vacationing in Mexico, at least.

Thank God (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272337)

I think we can now all breathe a huge sigh of relief as we know the dinosaurs did not, I repeat, did NOT suffer. We will all gain a few hours of sleep a night, I'm sure.

Oven set on broil. (5, Funny)

superdude72 (322167) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272349)

All unprotected creatures were 'baked by the equivalent of a global oven set on broil.'"

Thanks for the metaphor. This "heated air" concept is difficult to get across to the layperson.

conflicting theories (4, Interesting)

pedantic bore (740196) | more than 10 years ago | (#9272360)

Just a few weeks ago, the theory surfaced that the asteroid impact was only a factor in the demise of the dinosaurs (the dust caused the earths temperature to drop just a few degrees for several years -- which is a big deal if you're a reptile, but not so much if you're a mammal). Now there's a new theory that says the dinosaurs were burned alive. Next week, there will be another theory.

Personally, I'd like for these theories to go through a bit more critical review before they're broadcast to the public. This smacks as sensationalism more than science.

eh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9272377)

so what! just watch that mega-impact gasoline producer. YOU don't want to end up in a tank.
why is slashdot.orrrg slow? because they PICK their
editors. sorry for your post and non post reply.
it's proly an japanese feature slash back moral/ethics thing.
p.s. i wouldn't acre less as long as you post a descent link, but now-a-days it's all about form. tiny island though ...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>