Ames impact structure dating
GeologyComments
Is it really a blow to the debris ring theory? A single date shift is a correction, not a debunking. Are we overreacting to one site?
If the debris ring model depends on a tight temporal clustering of events, removing a major site like Ames could potentially push the remaining data below the threshold of statistical significance.
Since zircon crystals can be inherited or reworked, did the UT Austin team account for the possibility that these crystals predate the actual impact event?
We saw a similar pattern with the Sudbury basin revisions years ago. These definitive dates tend to drift as sampling techniques for zircons improve.
That makes me wonder about the Devonian period... does this mean there was an impact event then that we just hadn't linked to a specific crater yet?