The Dinosaur Debate

Paper Summary:

This paper attempts to prove why the impact theory is the most plausible reasoning behind the mass extinction that wiped out the dinosaurs and so many other species at the K-T boundary. By looking at the substantial amount of evidence for this theory, it examines how the impact theory as opposed to the volcanic theory is currently the most valid explanation for understanding why so many of the world's plants and animals died out at the end of the Cretaceous period.
Outline
What's in a Theory: The History of Mass Extinction Hypotheses
The K-T Boundary: The Cold, Hard Facts
The Impact Theory
The Volcanism Theory
Which is More Plausible?
Conclusion

From the Paper:

"As the years progressed and theories for mass extinction began to multiply, the concepts of catastrophism and uniformitarianism were born. Catastrophism is, "the doctrine that major changes in the Earth's crust result from catastrophes rather than evolutionary processes" (Catastrophism). In this definition, "catastrophes" include anything that cannot be explained by solid, proven, unwavering geological processes visible on the Earth. A flood of the magnitude recounted in the Bible would mean that the geological process of the water cycle would have to be sped up tremendously. This is a perfect example of catastrophism because at the time in which it was most widely-accepted, it was perfectly acceptable to society that the Flood was a largely disastrous event brought upon the Earth by God, and not a constant geological process such as weathering or volcanic activity."

More papers on The Dinosaur Debate:

• Analytical Essay # 148319 : "From Dinosaurs to Birds"
• Essay # 88984 : "Anti-Federalists and the Constitutional Debate"
• Essay # 67049 : "Barney the Dinosaur"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: