Re: End of the Paleozoic

"Gord" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I think you are slightly in error. This sounds like the Permian-Triassic
> extinction process.
>
> http://hannover.park.org/Canada/Museum/extinction/permcause.html
>
> http://palaeo.gly.bris.ac.uk/Palaeofiles/Permian/intro.html
>

Gord.  I should point out that the Permian-Triassic extinction WAS the end
of the Paleozoic era.

>
>
> "Joachim Pense" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Hi,
> >
> > this summer, I watched a TV documentation which stated that the
Paleozoic
> > was ended like this:
> > - First, there was a giant vulcanic activity around what is Siberia
today
> > (it sounded like more or less the greater part of the continent was
> > covered with lava)
> > - This led to a winter lasting several years,
> > - followed by a global warming.
> > - This warming alone was not enough to lead to the mass extinction; but
it
> > triggered the massive release of undersea frozen methane which - by
> > greenhouse effect - amplified the global warming leading to the observed
> > mass extinction, a process lasting around thousand years.
> >
> > Questions:
> > - Is this the current widely accepted theory?
> > - Did I get the points right?
> > - Why was the winter lasting for some years not sufficient for a mass
> > extinction? I imagine such a situation as being fairly deadly for many
> > species...
> >
> > Joachim
> >
> > --
> > I'd rather run Unix than Windows or MacOS any day, because Unix sucks
> less.
> > That doesn't mean it doesn't suck. (Jamie Zawinski)
>
>