Fridger:
I am not at all surprised by your reply. Based on the confrontational tone of the postings, from the moment the project was proposed, you have been prepared to desparage it.
how do you exclude this alternative to the meteorite
impact story around the K-T boundary:
Who said such a theory would be excluded? You did apparently. I certainly did not. I am aware of the volcanic eruption alternative, but it is not widely accepted because it does not have the scientific support that the impact theory has. In fact, I am unaware of virtally any discovery in science that does not have some detractors and gadflies. Over 30% of people on Earth actually still believe the Earth is the center of our solar system, according to a poll taken by an American research foundation. That does not stop scientists from telling another story. The nebula theory of the formation of our solar system, the collision theory to explain the formation of the moon, the life cycle theory of star and galaxy formation, global warming, evolution ... are all well extablished theories with opponents and critics. If we refused to publish or explain these theories in our schools or outline them in Celestia because there were other less accepted theories to counter them, we would have no science to teach!
To suggest that the existance of some alternative theory should be an argument to derail and stop an effort to depict the K-T Impact theory in Celestia, is counter-productive to the advancement of science education.
Perhaps the meteorite impact story is mainly preferred
by the media because of it's higher PR "value"?
It sure sounds like we are all fools for falling for some crackpot theory that "the media" likes for its PR value. Instead, as you should know, volcanic eruptions covering much of the Earth with ash and dust are not exactly a walk-in-the-park media story. In fact, it has been the subject of several of its own documentaries. The media cover the impact event primarily because it is the most supported by the facts, and most widely accepted by the astronomical and geological scientific community! Since you hold my work in such low regard, if you don't believe me ... ask them!
Falsifiability: Sad but true: many hypotheses
about dinosaur extinction sound quite convincing and
might even be correct, but, as you know, are not really
science if they cannot be proven or disproved
This statement is an attempt to desparage my credibility by suggesting that by seeking to believe in the impact theory, I can easily fall for false or unproven statements. I have heard similar claims about the volcanic eruption scenerio and the climate change scenerio, with lava flows and climate records claiming to be of a similar time frame but possibly false. Bending claims to match a theory is true in any scientific endeavor and in every theory, and it is ludricous to suggest that the presence of possible falsified facts by a few people who support a theory, is a rationale for rejecting or refusing to depict any theory on its face. If we all did that, there would be no presentation of anything!
Buggs and Frank seem to speak of different people:
Buggs: Dr. Ronald C. BLAKEY, Northern Arizona Univ.
http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~rcb7/ Frank: Dr. John D. BLAKLEY, 2001 Phd Thesis from Idaho State Univ.
Frank, obviously Ron BLAKEY is the right map guy, NOT your friend, BLAKLEY...
I have no idea where you got this idea. The map I referenced came from Ron Blakeley, not some PhD student. You need to get your facts straight, particularly if you intentionally try to highlight them in bold print to suggest I have no idea what I'm doing!!!
In the name of critical education::
Think of all the students that might be mislead by
a poorly founded project!
I also think such a rendering within Celestia would
be largely phantasy, at best with a few "half-solid" corner
stones.
I can't help the impression that at this badly researched
early stage, the enthusiastic announcement by Frank above, has little
solid foundation and thus is basically hot air:
Sorry, Frank, I am definitely NOT out to offend
you, but what I could read from you so far about your
plans indeed has VERY little substance.
(Even forgetting about your "Blakey <=> Blakley" mixup)
You sure had me fooled! As a Scientist, given the overwhelming evidence posted above from your quotes, I can conclude with scientific certainty that offending and ridiculing me to prove your own points is exactly the purpose of your postings! In fact, you are perhaps the most offensive professional I have ever conversed with.
Buggs:
Thanks for your reply to Fridger's ill-researched comments. I obviously would include some note in the Activity that there are several other theories to explain the K-T extinction. In fact, I had already begun writing the opening paragraphs which state just that.
I "assumed" that his hard work and references in building the
map was sufficient for Frank's needs...
The middle and high school kids I will be doing this Activity for don't care if the north pole has more or less ice than it used to, or whether some of the moon's craters today were not present back then. Most of them have NO IDEA that the dinosaurs died 65 million years ago, let alone what India's land mass or the Gulf of Mexico's shoreline might have looked like. Hell, many of them have been taught in Christian schools that man and dinosaurs co-existed together and we used to hunt them with bows and arrows. As such, if we can bring them the story of the K-T extinction as one plausible (the most plausible) theory of what happened, we will most definitely teach them some good science and enrich their lives.
I am not publishing to "Nature" here. Dr. Blakeley is just one of several recognized authorities in the field that I am studying, and in fact, he has been cited as such in numerous other educational sites. I presume that his maps were reasonably researched to depict the look and feel of Earth's land masses over the last several hundred million years. I am in no position to critique them, nor do I intend to do so. Rather, I am summarizing the prevailing theory of the K-T extinction in an educational activity that will be used primarily in high schools. It was my hope that we could get the story accurate enough to also be used by collegiate and government agencies, since Celestia is an ideal visual means of depicting the story. While the story certainly has standards to meet regarding accuracy, let's not make this such a burden that the entire effort is dropped. Celestia is a visual aid here. It can do a nice job of depicting THIS theory, or several others. I suggest we not overlook the purpose of this project ... to visually depict what things might have looked like.
Ajtribick's questions regarding the state of the solar system 65 million years ago are good questions, but do not have to be answered in this activity. Aside from some work on the rotation rate of Earth, I believe we can tell this story without knowing the orbital state of all of the planets, or the distance the Moon was from Earth at the time, or which craters on the moon are newer than 65 million years. Most of those things are totally unimportant to the purpose of the Activity, which is to convey to high school kids what that impact might have looked like, and how it may have wiped out most life on Earth.
Given the postings so far, I am withdrawing my offer to make this activity collaborative. I will give kids all over the world an opportunity to see what that impact might have done to Earth. They will find it provocative, fascinating and exciting, and if I include some caveats that many of the events depicted are speculative only (since we were not there), and that there are other possible explanations not as accepted for the extinction of the dinosaurs, I feel that both science and good education will be amply met.
Anyone willing to work with me on this privately, please email me.
Consider the topic closed.
Thanks for your concerns and comments
Frank
). I did not find publications which used the map,
