> The problem I have with this is the lack of brand new meteor craters to
> support the concept. One of most recent craters is the BArringer crater and
> it is 50 000 years old. If this hypothesis is true there should be some
> physical evidence in the form of very young, very fresh craters. I know of
> none. Do you?
>
> glenn
>
> Foundation, Fall and Flood
> Adam, Apes and Anthropology
> http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm
>
> Lots of information on creation/evolution
Can't say I do, no. But then I wouldn't expect to, it's not something I've
studied. If *you* don't, then that's far more significant. What struck me
as odd is that if this hypothesis is true, why has it taken so long to come
to light. Perhaps because of lack of craters, as you suggest. It was
reported in what I hope would be a fairly reliable source - NASA news,
I think it was - so I guessed it should at least be something not too
unreasonable. As I said, I haven't yet had time to look at the article
itself, I should be able to do that today.
What was on my mind though was something I vaguely remember
reading about genetic studies - mtDNA I think it was, though I'm not
entirely sure - which mentioned a surprising lack of diversity in humans
as opposed to apes, and suggesting a more recent divergence than
usually believed. If something like comet/asteroid collision, or indeed
any natural disaster, like volcanoes as Kevin suggested, did occur,
maybe more than once, and reduce the population significantly, this
would explain the discrepancy. (This is probably old hat, anyway!)
This is a lot longer ago than Rome, etc, I know!
I guess the article is also of interest given the recent 'hype' about the
likelihood of such a collision in the near future, and the various disaster
movies which were made just a few years ago!
/Gary