Basic HTML Version
Aprii-May, 1970
evidence shows that African wildlife
is just a shadow of its former self.
The same is true for South America.
Today, there are few large animals in
that continent. However, the fossil
record contains the bones of animals
called glyptodonts, toxodonts, macrau–
chenia and other beasts with equally
strange-sounding names.
Europe and Asia were also struck
by this mammalicide. But what was
responsible for this mass zoological
homicide? A recent authoritative book
on the subject is called
Pleistocene
Extinctions, The Search for a Came.
The book title reveals the truth: sci–
entists are still "searching" for a cause.
lt
is still
a
rnystery. But why?
Why is the Case of the Colossal
Catastrophe still such an enigma? Why
has no Shedock Holmes of paleon–
tology been able to put together the
dues - and deduce the answer?
The basis for the dilemma goes back
many, many decades to the time of
Charles Darwin. He too was mystified
by this universal manunal butchery.
A
butcbery which apparently gave the
co11p de grace
to so many species and
genera.
Darwin Puzzles Over the Evidence
In his book
The Origin of Species
Darwin wrote, "The extinction of spe–
cies has been involved in the most gra–
tuitous mystery . . . No one can have
marvelled more than
I
have at the
extinction of species" (Charles Darwin,
The Origin of Species,
New York: Col–
lier, 1962, p. 341).
Darwin was referring to his five-year
cruise as amateur naturalist aboard
tbe H.M.S. Beagle. In his notes he
revealed
WHY
he and the paleontol–
ogists · of today are puzzled by the
record of catastrophic deatb found in
tbe rocks.
"What then, has exterminated so ·
many species and whole genera?" Dar–
win asked in astonishment, "The mind
at first is irresistibly hurried into the
belief of sorne great catastrophe; but
thus to destroy animals, both large and
small, in Southern Patagonia, in Brazil,
on the Cordillera of Peru, in North
America up to Behring's [Bering's]
Straits,
WE MUST SHAKE THE
Tbe
PLAIN TRUTH
ENTIRE Fl?.AMEWORK OF THE
GLOBE"
(Charles Darwin,
Joumal of
Researches into the Nat/tral History a11d
Geology of the C01mtries Visited Dm·–
in
g
the
V
oyage of H
.M
.S.
Beagle
R01md the
IV
orld,
citation under date
of January
9,
1834).
A
Worldwide Catastrophe?
The same thought of violent catas–
trophe struck Alfred Russel Wallace in
the latter 1800's. Nonscientists today
generally do not know very much about
Wallace. He, in fact, developed the idea
of biological evolution simultaneously
with Darwin. Had Darwin not been
persuaded to publish his ideas, Wallace
would have beat him to the punch and
published first. As it turned out, both of
them read their papers at the same
meeting to avert any possible bad
feelings.
Wallace, like Darwin, was a shrewd
observer and student of zoology and
paleontology. He likewise was struck by
the decimation of mammal life in pre–
historic times.
In 1876, Wallace wrote, "We live in
a zoologically impoverished world,
from which all the hugest, and fiercest,
and strangest forms have recently dís–
appeared ... yct it is surely a marvelous
fact, and one that has hardly been suf–
ficiently dwelt upon thís sudden dying
out of so many large Mammalia, not in
one place only but over half the land
surface of tbe globe" ( Alfred Russel
Wallace,
Geographical Dist1'ib11tion of
Animals,
New York: Hafner, 1962,
Vol.l, p.l50).
Wallace's immediate conclusíon was
that, "There must have been sorne phys–
ical cause for
this
great change; and it
must have been a cause capable of act–
íng alrnost simultaneously over large
portions of the earth's surface" (
Ibid.,
p.
151).
What Was tbe Cause?
Darwin, Wallace and other scientists
of that day put forth theories to explain
this worldwide decimation of animal
life. But no theory was accepted by all
scientists. ALL the theories had weak
poínts; no one idea accounted for all the
phenomena.
Especially puzzling were the fossils
of extinct anima!s in the deep Alaska
muck beds. Equally perplexing was the
19
Siberian record. The evidence at face
value told a story of violent catastrophe.
The record demanded area-wide, conti–
nent-wide - indeed
WORLDWIDE -
and simultaneous catastrophe.
This baffied the original workers, it
baffies scientists today. Indeed, any ideas
put forth today are generally rehashes
of theories thought of long ago.
"The mysteries of extinction are so
many and so baffiing," wrote two
archaeologists, "tbat it is small wonder
no book in English has been written on
the subject. Since 1906, when Henry
Fairfield Osborn summed the matter up
ín his papee of .fifty-odd pages, 'The
Causes of Extinction of Mammalia,'
Eiseley (famed anthropologist] credits
only two theories with contributíng any–
thing new to the discussion" (Kenneth
Macgowan and Joseph Hester,
Early
Man
in
the New World,
New York:
Doubleday, 1962, p. 202).
Were Ice Ages Responsible?
Earlier workers postulated that Ice
Ages were responsible for the mass
killings. Not long ago, many paleontol–
ogists became rather cool to this idea.
And for good reasons. The death-by–
refrigeration idea simply didn't hold
water. It was put into deep freeze stor–
age largely for the followíng reason,
neatly summed up in a book already
quoted.
"Horses, carnels, sloths, antelopes, all
found slim pickings in their former
habitat. But what was to prevent these
animals from simply following the
retreating ice to find just the
type
of
vegetation and just the climate they
desired?
If
Newport is cold in the win–
ter, go to Florida.
If
Washington
becomes hot in the summer, go to
Maine" (Frank
C.
Hibben,
The Lost
Americam,
New York, Apollo Editions,
1961, p. 176).
This was a good question
!
And it
couldn't be·answered.
A typical problem was the glypto–
dont. Paleontologists regarded hirn as
strictly tropical in adaptation. But here
was tbe rub. Glaciation could not
account for his extinction- unless.
"Unless one is willing to postulate
freezing temperatures across the egua–
toe, such an explanation cleady begs
the question of their extinction in