CHAPTER 1.8
SOLVING THE MASS EXTINCTIONS

   
CHAPTER 1.8
CONCLUSIONS FOR THE "SAFE, CONSERVATIVE" VERSION


Section I of this book presents the "safe, conservative" version of Ben's Antipodal Impact Theory. This theory presents the case that antipodal volcanism is the natural result of a large impact.

Furthermore, by extension, the theory concludes that virtually all of the major mass extinctions can be explained by the two related events of large impacts and antipodal volcanism.

This "safe, conservative" version of Ben's Antipodal Impact Theory is deliberately limited in its scope, so that it can be compared, side by side, to the Standard Theory, based upon this limited scope.

The comparison of the "safe, conservative" version of Ben's Antipodal Impact Theory with the Standard Theory yields the following differences:

1. Location of India 65 MYA — As far as I can determine, the location of India 65 MYA is not important to the Standard Theory, except as a way to explain the massive eruptions at the Deccan traps (currently seen as the result of India passing over the Reunion hotspot off the east African coast). If another mechanism for explaining the massive eruptions of the Deccan traps were discovered, there is no good reason why it could not replace the current mechanism used by the Standard Theory. The location of India at the antipode of the Chicxulub impact would meet this criterion if the mechanism of antipodal volcanism is accepted. Furthermore, this relocation would solve a number of problems that the currently accepted location does not. These problems include:

a. Lack of Domal Uplift at the Deccan traps
b. Actual Eruptions occurred at 30 degrees south
c. Underlayment of basalt under the western side of India and then it just stops.
d. The creation of the Sunda Trench
e. The timing, shape and composition of the land in Java and Sumatra


2. Molten Layer of Olivine at the Mantle/Core Boundary — The Standard Theory hypothesizes occasional pockets of liquid olivine at the mantle/core boundary. Ben's Antipodal Impact Theory hypothesizes a layer of liquid rock, rich in olivine, at this boundary. This layer of liquid olivine is key to the functioning of Ben's antipodal volcanism mechanism, and it is hardly less likely than occasional pockets that just happen to occur.

3. Frictional Release Threshold — Ben's Antipodal Impact Theory hypothesizes the idea that the extreme vibration in the interior of the mantle (resulting from a large impact) would cause the mantle to reach its Frictional Release Threshold, at which point liquid olivine, under great pressure, could be forced through the mantle up to the underside of the lithosphere, forming a mantle plume. This mechanism would allow large impacts to create contemporaneous antipodal mantle plumes. A statistical analysis of the only four large impacts of the last 100 million years (larger than 55 km in diameter) shows that the chances that these impacts and contemporaneous mantle plumes near their antipodes are merely random occurances are much less than 16,000,000 to one. The Standard Theory claims that mantle plumes are unrelated to impacts. Statistical analysis shows that this argument by the Standard Theory is extremely unlikely.


These are the only differences between the "safe, conservative" version of Ben's Antipodal Impact Theory and the Standard Theory.

I would argue that, concerning this limited scope of antipodal volcanism, Ben's Antipodal Impact Theory offers a much better fit with the facts than does the current Standard Theory.