Dinosaur extinction was probably by Sun particles

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by lbiarge, Feb 23, 2013.

  1. Gravage Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,241
    Actually, dinosaurs ruled the Earth for over 160 million years.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    I don't speak over a magnetic field flip, like you say occurs in short periods.

    I speak over a combination that permit that the sun particles arrive to the planet, this combination maybe by sun activity and magnetic field in many quantities.

    The Sun has periods of more activity and not only the 11 years periods, for example:

    "The causes of ice ages are not fully understood for both the large-scale ice age periods and the smaller ebb and flow of glacial–interglacial periods within an ice age. The consensus is that several factors are important: atmospheric composition, such as the concentrations of carbon dioxide and methane" - Here where are the evidences? - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age#Causes_of_ice_ages

    You doubt that glaciations probably has relation with Sun activity? and many other probably posibilities.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    More:

    The iridium - "the iridium occurs in a layer just above the last Cretaceous microfossils," this probably means the solution to the impact in a probably 11,000 years after the extinction. - http://mygeologypage.ucdavis.edu/cowen/~GEL107/KT.html

    A probably: I see you understand that the impact is previous, later dead dinosaurs and later probably 1000 years later the iridium take land. This is near impossible, how any species survive the impact?

    If would dead by the impact the iridium would to be at same level, the take of land would be like much 1 - 2 years later and probably less.


    In that subjectiv study not find other probably layers with more iridium, asteroids impact near every time. And also not study (maybe they make this study, I have not find) if the layers correspond all at same time.


    But may occur all at same time, we know that in a difference of + or - 11,000 years maximun a good asteriod impact.


    The proof of the iridium for me is: the dinousaus extinct, then later in a time until 11,000 years or less have impact the asteroid, and without extinction effects, the animals in few number after o into that bad period of dead not are extincted.


    In all form, the populations in time before the extinction are decreasing, probably in exctintion danger, but not only the dinosaurs, all the species, the dinosaurs extinct and other but not all.

    False is to say that the extinction of the dinosaurs is by impact later that already the scientist with their subjectiv studies discover is false, but continue say that is true.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    I'm preparing a more elaborated work with evidences, ... but an advance:

    3 proofs or if you like 3 coincidences:

    1 - At same time of dinosaurs extinction is the big marine reptile extinction, against this the sharks survive, reptiles need to go to surface to breathe but sharks have gill and by that not need.

    The so called extinction by impact need that the Sun get dark by dust and this difficult the photosynthesis, eat of vegetables … but these reptile are carnivores and can eat sharks … and in sea there are not barriers.

    In relation to Sun particles the big marine reptiles need to go to surface and receive more quantity of particles.

    2 - Older species admit more radiation that new species.

    3 - "Many scientists have suggested that ionizing radiation was responsible for mass extinctions” – this is according to Sun particles - http://www.livingcosmos.com/evolution.htm and not with impact.

    More: “Much in the fossil record confirms this evolutionary scheme. Ionizing radiation is evident in the geologic and fossil records as irradiated minerals, such as iridium, tektites and microtektites, bones that are radioactive, mummified fossils, abrupt shifts in the levels of elements known as isotopes, and selective extinctions. The huge deposits of fossilized bones that make-up phosphate rock deposits is staggering, and they are often radioactive. The conditions under which these fossil bones were deposited do not exist today, as they appear to have been cut off from both sea and air, and no sedimentation took place as they were laid down. The chemical process that transformed the bones into phosphate is unknown and could have involved ionizing radiation, especially since the deposits are radioactive.” - http://www.livingcosmos.com/evolution.htm - here you can read also information over iridium

    All this are in relation with Sun particles that is near to nuclear power and against impact.
     
  8. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,795
    What are 'sun particles?'
     
  9. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    Solar wind - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_wind

    Solar storms - http://www.thestar.com/business/201...sun_particles_the_power_could_go_out_too.html

    Particle flow from the Sun - http://www.cnes.fr/web/CNES-en/1398-particle-flow-from-the-sun.php

    "Aurora Borealis" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora_(astronomy)

    Natural Sources of Particle Radiation - http://resources.yesican-science.ca/trek/radiation/final/index_natural_par.html
    that affect to astronauts, ...

    Radiation from the sun can be measured in terms of solar particle energies. - How do astronauts survive radiation on the moon? - http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_do_astronauts_survive_radiation_on_the_moon
     
  10. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,795
    Ah. If you're talking about solar wind (charged particles emitted from the Sun) then no, that didn't cause any extinctions. Solar wind does not penetrate the atmosphere, and all the charged particles are stopped well above the surface of the Earth. A strong solar wind combined with a lack of a magnetic field can cause loss of atmosphere, but that hasn't happened here to any significant degree.
     
  11. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    "Every day we are hit by a blizzard of radioactive particles. It's called the solar wind and it carries about one million tons of electrically-charged gas particles, away from the sun every second" - http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/23degrees/2011/01/the_sun_and_the_solar_wind_ear.html

    You say none.

    I also add that in many times the magnetic field change and also the Sun emission, a combination is possible.

    " A strong solar wind combined with a lack of a magnetic field can cause loss of atmosphere," - but a many strong, or also a supernova explosion.

    I also add the point 3 before (1 more time): "3 - "Many scientists have suggested that ionizing radiation was responsible for mass extinctions” – this is according to Sun particles - http://www.livingcosmos.com/evolution.htm and not with impact."
     
  12. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,795
    ?? No, I said the Earth's atmosphere shields us from those particles. (They are not radioactive by the way; they do not emit radiation. Their threat comes from their energy, not their decay emissions.)

    You are confusing extrasolar radiation with solar wind. Ionizing gamma or cosmic radiation (i.e. from a nearby supernova) could indeed cause an extinction event. These are not "sun particles" (i.e. solar wind.)
     
  13. origin Trump is the best argument against a democracy. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,993
    It is definitely possible that other causes such as a gamma ray burst aimed at earth could have caused or contributed to the mass extinction at the KT boundry. But it is highly unlikely that the sun, for some unknown, reason suddenly emitted enough radiation to cause the extinctions. The sun particle idea is therefore just conjecture.

    The loss of sunlight to the earth would cause a complete ecological breakdown on the land AND the sea. The base of the food chain in the ocean are photoplankton. Most of the large marine reptiles died out before the KT boundry. The remaining marine reptiles did not make it past the KT boundry, except for sea turtles. By the way the shark population was devestated at the KT boundry, based on the number of species that went extinct.

    I don't know what this is suppose to mean. Do you mean old people get more radiation than young people? Do you mean longer lived species get more radiation than shorter lived species? Do you mean that a species that has existed for the longest time gets the most radiation???

    Yes but I don't know of a theory that says that radiation came from the sun. We do not have definitive proof as to what caused the extinctions - but your sun conjecture is not likely.

    This paragraph is a jumble of misunderstandings and falacies.
     
  14. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    "For example, the levels of ionizing radiation and radio interference can vary by factors of hundreds to thousands" - "Earth itself is largely protected from the solar wind by its magnetic field, which deflects most of the charged particles; however some of the charged particles are trapped in the Van Allen radiation belt." - "CMEs cause shock waves in the thin plasma of the heliosphere, launching electromagnetic waves and accelerating particles (mostly protons and electrons) to form showers of ionizing radiation that precede the CME" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_wind

    "From the European Space Agency’s Cluster mission, a new study has taken place that proposes it easier for the solar wind to infiltrate the magnetosphere than it had been previously believed" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_wind

    "What Problems Do Solar Winds Cause for Technology?" - "Problems Caused by the Solar Wind - In power systems especially, geomagnetic storms induce strong currents within transformers" - "Minimizing Solar Wind Impacts - Utility companies and other technology-based operations can minimize the impacts from geomagnetic storms." - http://www.ehow.com/way_5743486_problems-solar-winds-cause-technology_.html

    The perfect solar storm? Sun eruptions to peak in 2013 - "A massive solar storm, like the one that knocked out radio communications all over the U.S. in 1958, is coming, and this time the devastation could total as much as $2 trillion, experts told FoxNews.com. Call it the perfect solar storm." - http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/01/14/perfect-solar-storm-sun-activity-to-peak-in-2013/

    etc, etc
     
  15. origin Trump is the best argument against a democracy. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,993
    This is correct but does not add anything new to your conjecture. Even without a magnetic field the solar wind would be attenuated by the atmosphere. The tenth thckness for alpha particles is on the order of a few centimeters in air, for beta particles it is a few meters and for protons it is tens of meters.

    OK, but this does not help you conjecture either.

    Yep, geomagnetic storms will compress the magnetic field and these changes in the the magnetic field induces a current in power lines which can overload system componets. Since as far as we know the dinosaurs did not have a power grid, this does not support your position.

    The dinosaurs did not have communication satelites so that probably was not the cause of the extinctions. Dinosaurs did not have a monetary system - so again a loss in the GNP probably did not result in a mass extinction.

    Bla, bla :yawn:
     
  16. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,795
    Correct. Fortunately we have an atmosphere to protect us.

    Correct. Fortunately we have an atmosphere to protect us.

    Correct. Fortunately we have an atmosphere to protect us.

    Correct. Fortunately we have an atmosphere to protect us.

    Dinosaurs didn't have transformers.

    Yep. It might knock out a lot of radio links and even damage power lines. Dinosaurs don't care about that stuff.

    I think perhaps learning a bit more about solar wind might give you a better insight to the risks that it poses to both us and life on the planet.
     
  17. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    Very probably the effect is very high that I consider:


    "Radiation exposure of airline passengers" - http://www.bfs.de/en...passagiere.html


    This is probably a negationist but also is usefull (he deny the effect of radioactivy in the "pregnant women exposed to medical radiation") : "So, even during large solar flares, passengers will not receive a radiation dose to be concerned about, but pregnant women worry about the effects on their children" - http://hps.org/publi...solarflare.html


    more in google : http://www.google.co...lane passengers


    This is usefull because a person is in a airplane few time, but a little more bigger solar wind but in many time, ... or less magnetic field can make many more effects.
     
  18. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Moderator

    Messages:
    6,697
    I would reply to your reply of mine but it is so incoherent and poorly written that it is pretty much impossible to follow. Please try to construct responses in a coherent manner.

    'Probably'? By what metric are you able to conclude something as 'probable'? Possible and probable are two entirely different things. It's possible enormous unusual solar activity caused a mass extinction but is it probable? Without evidence it is impossible to say. Besides, the removal of the Earth's magnetic field doesn't mean mass extinction, the atmosphere filters out a lot of radiation all on its own.

    This 'probable' comment of yours makes the same sort of mistake creationists make when they attack evolution or the big bang. It supposes that if the mainstream view is rebutted then their view is the alternative, ie disprove the big bang model and you prove creationism. That's a false dichotomy. Similarly even if the dinosaurs were not obliterated by an impact event that doesn't mean radiation from the Sun killed them. Climactic variations happen without the need for the Sun to change behaviour or the magnetic field to drop. The distribution of the continents has an enormous impact on the long term dynamics of the climate and over the millions of years the dinosaurs existed the continents moved around a lot, impacting the temperature of the planet significantly all on their own. The magnetic field of the Earth doesn't block electromagnetic radiation, it blocks charged particles. The same amount of infra red and visible light falls on the Earth regardless of the magnetic field strength.

    To justify your 'probably' you need to show firstly, using climate models, that increased solar wind impacting the upper atmosphere results in significant changes to the climate (ie greater heating on a global scale perhaps). You then need to present geological evidence that around the same time as the impact event, which pushed the dinosaurs to extinction, there was sufficient solar radiation falling on the Earth to result in such changes. Perhaps particular isotopes in the certain rock formations.

    When you can provide such a model your claims are worth considering as viable. Until then you only have 'maybe' or 'could' or 'possibly', you don't have 'did' or 'probable'. At the moment you just have supposition and random guessing. Taking the approach "Since it isn't excluded it should be seriously considered" is not a way to do good science. You put forth an idea you need to put forth some real motivation for it, saying "Well your idea isn't entirely perfect" isn't sufficient.
     
  19. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    I don't say that phrases, that phases are say by "Team leader Paul Renne", so critique to their, that phrase are in "New Evidence Suggests Comet or Asteroid Impact Was Last Straw for Dinosaurs" in http://paleontoriano.blogspot.com.es/2013/02/new-evidence-suggests-comet-or-asteroid.html

    so ""Dramatic climate variation over the previous million years, including long cold snaps amidst a general Cretaceous hothouse environment, probably brought many creatures to the brink of extinction, and the impact kicked them over the edge." is from Renne team
     
  20. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Moderator

    Messages:
    6,697
    No, you used 'probably' when you added 'a probably Sun particles?'. I wasn't referring to the 'probably' in the quote you posted, I was referring to the 'probably' in what you said afterwards. As such my point stands.
     
  21. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,795
    Great example. Even for crews who fly every week of their lives, the radiation during even the worst of solar storms is negligible - and this is in an aircraft flying above 75% of our atmosphere's mass. And we have four times the mass of air to protect us down here.
     
  22. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Has the OP checked on the pattern of magnetic reversals during the Upper Maastrichtian?

    I had a large reply typed up at one stage yesterday but I was on my phone, and I managed to hit cancel trying to get to a typo (Touch screen + fat fingers).

    Dinosaurs weren't the only group to suffer extinction, they're just the most famous.

    The pattern of extinctions at the K-Pg boundary actually supports the impact hypothesis, for example, among the land animals, those that survived were capable fo sheltering in water (eg crocodyliforms), able to burrow (eg mamals), or shelter in various nooks and cranies (eg avians).

    The OP has made much of the survival of crocodyliforms, however, the OP is seemingly unaware that approximately 50% of crocdyliforms did not survive the K-Pg extinction event. The pattern seems to be that the large ones did not survive. Even as far as mamals go, Marsupials did not survive in North America, neither, for that matter, did nearly 60% of plants.

    I'm sure there was more I was going to say, however, for the most part I can't remember. Perhaps the OP should watch this youtube video The last day of the Dinosaurs (1h 5m).
     
  23. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    All they mean is that throughout the Maastrichtian, Dinosaurs faced environmental pressures that were, or may, have been causing a loss of biodiversity. It was, however, the chixculub impact that delivered the killing blow.
     

Share This Page