are you a parrot? I have heard you say this already 37 times.
You should get out more.vallich said:I have NEVER been subjected to so much abuse in my academic career as I have been subjected with you three banded and anonomous muskateers.
valich said:After obtaining five degrees…I think I am qualified to consider myself more of a scientist than you.
spuriousmonkey said:Five degrees in what?
valich said:What does it matter? What's it to you? What's the point?
I never attributed all five extinctions to meteors. At the end of the Ordovician massive glaciers covered Gondwana, sea levels and ocean temps dropped and this is thought to have caused 75% of the species to become extinct during this mass extinction. The mass extinction at the end of the Permian is attributed to a meteor as well as other causes (lava outpouring), Another meteor caused the mass extinction at the end of the Cretaceous. That's 2 out of 5. Although I believe I did also state that during the mass extinction that marked the end of the Devonian, two large meteorites hit the earth: one in Nevada and the other in Western Australia. There may have been other causes.Ophiolite said:Spurious it will be impossible for him to re-read the thread: that would require that he had read it in the first place, rather than scanned a few words, then reacted to those words.
At least he is no longer claiming meteorites as the cause of all five extinctions. I have him on ignore again - remarkable really. I have never put anyone on ignore before, now he has made it twice.
Vallich, don't bother replying to this - I wont see it. Just be aware that I am pleased to note your climb down from describing the demise of the dinosaurs as being wholly due to the Yucatan (not Yucan, though I suppose you can spell it any way you please) strike, and now conceding a possible contribution from other factors.
Neutrino_Albatross said:While doing a little reasearch for a rather idiotic religion thread i came across a website saying that the theory that dinosaurs were wiped out by an astroid impact is not widely accepted before. Ive never heard anything like this before but I think its fairly convincing and Id like to see what other people think: http://www.livingcosmos.com/k-t.htm
You are not attacking anyone and you make an excellent comment, but when I have posted citations I have been ridiculed by other participants that I am not stating this or that in my own words. As a biologist, you are aware of proper protocol in discussion. I think you should post a quote or a question. You are certainly more than welcome.slxpluvs said:These are all very interesting posts, but I feel that most of them were put up in quite a bit of haste. I'm a biologist, so I'm not that familiar with this paleontologistic subject matter; I apologize if there are different protocol in this field and I'm making myself the fool.
Why is it that so few of you cite primary documentation or even review articles from respected, peer-reviewed journals? I understand this is a forum for discussion, but many posts declare their correctness without any evidence, even when their declarations are brought into question. And when people do make references, they often omit the year of publication or enough information that the original source can be read.
Again, I’m not trying to attack for the sake of attacking. I think that this is a very interesting conversation. I also think, however, that the only way for conversations of this nature to go beyond the level of banter is to help each other by giving them access to your information.
--Mike
You have not been riduculed for that. You have been riducled for quote mining and for not having either the honour or the courage to admit when you were in error.You are not attacking anyone and you make an excellent comment, but when I have posted citations I have been ridiculed by other participants that I am not stating this or that in my own words.