Re: Milankovich Cycles

[Tompaleo@xxxxxxx]

On June 30, 1994 Jere Lipps wrote.

Tough to infer an asteroid from paleontological data.  I think we should
get out of that business since the fossil evidence does not say anything
about an impact.  It can only tell us something about the environmental
conditions, before and after an extinction event, and perhaps the timing.
The evidence comes from geochemistry, mineralogy, geologic mapping, and
such things that would record an impact.   Now that does not mean that we
don't have much to contribute, for example by defining closely the pre and
post evironments, we could then ask our physical/chemical colleagues to get
us from one to another with their scenario, which usually causes them all
kinds of trouble.  But if we argue about impacts from fossil evidence
alone, we degrade our own positions because our data do not speak to
impacts.

End of Quote____________________________________________

Thank you Jere!
This is what I have been trying to say (both on and off  the list and not as
eloquently). The more intractible among us seem to be defending their own
turf rather than to accept the fact that NO ONE FIELD of research will
unequivocally resolve this issue. If anything right or wrong, the Alvarez
theory screams "an interdisciplinary approach" must be taken and to stop
thinking so geocentric! <<I just made that up :-)

                                      Regards,
                                      Thomas R. Lipka
                                      Paleontological/Geological Studies