We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
''We believe dinosaurs were most likely to be cold-blooded creatures and would have needed the warmth to keep them alive,” he said.
“If they were unable to migrate south they could have been wiped out. Climate change is now very much on the agenda in trying to determine how the dinosaurs became extinct.
“We now believe that they died out gradually and it is very possible that this could have been caused by a series of climatic changes.''
The drop in temperature is thought to have occurred because high levels of CO2 were in the atmosphere which caused global temperatures to rise and polar ice to melt – a phenomenon currently predicted for Earth.
The scientist quoted in the article is half a century behind the times. It's been at least that long since anybody seriously thought dinosaurs were just lizards writ big. The case for warm-blooded dinosaurs has been considered more or less conclusive for at least the last decade.
He is talking about a particular die-off, there were several - some slow, some more rapid.
- - -
Whether endothermic or exothermic, when temp changes organisms adapted to the old temp will likely die off. A penguin released into the forests of the Amazon, or a cobra released on an Antarctican glacier.
And temp change may sometimes be slow enough to allow such as some species to survive during a centuries-long process or sometimes fast enough to freeze a mammoth in its tracks with just-consumed flowers in its stomach.
I thought that a super-volcano (or else huge asteroid) had put so much dust into the atmosphere that the sun's rays were partially obliterated; the weather was exceptionally cool and much of the vegetation died off (and so did the animals that required it for food)... Sort of like the "Year without Summer" in 1816 after Mt Tambora erupted, except persisting for years.
It was actually anticipatory extinction that did it. The Earth was so angry that humans would eventually heat up the globe and fail to heed Al Gore's brave cries, that it preemptively wiped out the dinosaurs, just to show us. A similar mechanism is at work, with a vengeful Earth causing earthquakes, volcanoes, tornadoes, and sunspots.
Please! The earthquakes for sure, and the volcanoes, tornadoes, and sunspots, oh my, are caused by "immodest women tempting innocent men." It says so right here in this fatwa my neighbor's cousin's friend brought back from the middle east.
The evidence for a mass extinction as a result ... not so much.
That was one of the arguments back in the day, possible because of the sparse fossil evidence across the KT boundary, but I believe that as the actual evidence increased the case for sudden mass extinction became much stronger.
As to the cooling, the first thing to survive would be living under a red hot sky. All the hot rock up in the sky would act something like a broiler. There is evidence of widespread forest fires all across North America at the time. As to a green house climate like the present day, the Cretaceous average temperature was about 10C warmer than today; we are living a glacial age. Frankly, I'm not sure there would have even been a gulf stream given the plate configuration at the time.
Reminds me a bit of a talk by Robert (warm blooded dinosaurs) Bakker back when the impact theory was still controversial. Bakker's argument was that a land bridge had formed, leading to migrations and the spread of diseases, resulting in mass extinctions. Good talk, I commented to my friends after, totally wrong of course, but a good argument even so. I don't think Gregory Price has made a good argument, however. Although one should never judge such things on the basis of a newspaper article.