Double meteorite strike 'caused dinosaur extinction'

Double trouble for dinosaurs: Did more than one meteorite strike cause their demise?

The dinosaurs were wiped out 65 million years ago by at least two meteorite impacts, rather than a single strike, a new study suggests.

Previously, scientists had identified a huge impact crater in the Gulf of Mexico as the event that spelled doom for the dinosaurs.

Now evidence for a second impact in Ukraine has been uncovered.

This raises the possibility that the Earth may have been bombarded by a whole shower of meteorites.

The new findings are published in the journal Geology by a team lead by Professor David Jolley of Aberdeen University.

When first proposed in 1980, the idea that a meteorite impact had killed the dinosaurs proved hugely controversial. Later, the discovery of the Chicxulub Crater in the Gulf of Mexico, US, was hailed as "the smoking gun" that confirmed the theory.

Double trouble

The discovery of a second impact crater suggests that the dinosaurs were driven to extinction by a "double whammy" rather than a single strike.

The Boltysh Crater in Ukraine was first reported in 2002. However, until now it was uncertain exactly how the timing of this event related to the Chicxulub impact.

In the current study, scientists examined the "pollen and spores" of fossil plants in the layers of mud that infilled the crater. They found that immediately after the impact, ferns quickly colonised the devastated landscape.

Ferns have an amazing ability to bounce back after catastrophe. Layers full of fern spores - dubbed "fern spikes" - are considered to be a good "markers" of past impact events.

However, there was an unexpected discovery in store for the scientists.

They located a second "fern spike" in a layer one metre above the first, suggesting another later impact event.

Professor Simon Kelley of the Open University, who was co-author on the study, said: "We interpret this second layer as the aftermath of the Chicxulub impact."

This shows that the Boltysh and Chicxulub impacts did not happen at exactly the same time. They struck several thousand years apart, the length of time between the two "fern spikes".

Uncertain cause

Professor Kelley continued: "It is quite possible that in the future we will find evidence for more impact events."

Rather than being wiped out by a single hit, the researchers think that dinosaurs may have fallen victim to a meteorite shower raining down over thousands of years.

What might have caused this bombardment is highly uncertain.

Professor Monica Grady, a meteorite expert at the Open University who was not involved in the current study, said: "One possibility might be the collison of Near Earth Objects."

Recently, Nasa launched a program dubbed "Spaceguard". It aims to monitor such Near Earth Objects as an early warning system of possible future collisons.

MySpace Launches Facebook Status Update Syncing

MySpace, once Facebook’s bitter rival, is embracing the social network in a big way today with the launch of status updating syncing for Facebook.

Sync for Facebook () allows users to broadcast their MySpace () status updates to their Facebook friends. In addition to status updates, users can share their links, photos, videos, music and even application installations from MySpace to Facebook. This is in addition to Sync for Twitter, which the company launched last year.

Facebook-MySpace sync isn’t perfect, though. The big thing that’s missing is the ability to share Facebook status updates on MySpace. Jen Ruffner, director of product management for stream, told me that MySpace simply wanted to get this product out the door as quickly as possible, but is planning on bringing two-way sync between the social networks in the near future.

MySpace says that it doesn’t believe sync will marginalize MySpace in any way. “People use different social networks for different things,” Ruffner responded. The company is focused on giving artists and users the ability to share their MySpace content on as many channels as possible, and that includes Facebook.

MySpace hasn’t been afraid to latch onto Facebook for growth. Earlier this year, MySpace added Facebook Connect for its Fan Video service. Sync for Facebook is a far bigger step towards integrating the two social networks, though.

Will Sync for Facebook make you use MySpace more? Will you broadcast your MySpace updates to Facebook and vice-versa? Let us know in the comments.

Google and Associated Press Make Content Licensing Deal

Google has inked a deal with the Associated Press to keep the news organization’s content on Google News, an issue that was very much in doubt for a time earlier this year when the news aggregator stopped posting AP content as the two sides worked on a new deal.

In a brief statement, the AP says that the companies “have reached a new agreement on the continued licensing of AP content by Google (). Under the agreement, AP and Google will also work together in a number of new areas, such as ways to improve discovery and distribution of news.” The AP signed a similar agreement with Yahoo back in February.

In the past, the AP has taken a strong stand against content aggregators (of the non-paying variety) and at one point somewhat infamously introduced a policy of charging $2.50 per word for using excerpts from AP content (a policy they quickly said was misinterpreted). The AP also toyed with the idea of charging news outlets for priority access to breaking news.

For now, it appears the AP has gone in a more conventional direction, however, taking an undisclosed sum of money from Google for the rights to host its content.

Tubby Toney cashes unearned check

Boxer James Toney (above) lost to Randy Couture in the first round of Saturday's UFC 118 bout in Boston.
(Josh Hedges/Getty Images)

BOSTON – The only proof that boxer James Toney trained with any reasonable effort for his Ultimate Fighting Championship debut is anecdotal – supposedly he dropped 40 pounds just to enter the Octagon at a bloated, bubbly 237.

The deck is stacked against any boxer trying to compete in mixed martial arts – just as it would be for an MMA fighter in a boxing match. It’s why almost no one even tries.

But Toney agreed to match up with UFC legend Randy Couture anyway, then he embarrassed himself and his sport by hardly looking like he prepared for a fight that was billed as boxing vs. MMA, even if it was never going to prove anything.

Instead of some definitive statement we got a ridiculous result – Couture earning an easy victory by arm triangle submission at 3:31 of the first round. Toney is nicknamed “Lights Out.” On this night, he never bothered to turn them on.

“Toney lasted longer than I thought he would,” UFC president Dana White said, which isn’t saying much.

Toney is the current IBA heavyweight boxing champion, one of 11 belts he’s held in five weight classes in his impressive career. He had only one route to victory on Saturday night: Landing a perfectly timed punch. Couture, a former All-American wrestler, shot in for a takedown. Toney, who didn’t show up for the postfight news conference, never really threw – let alone land – a significant punch. He fought in what appeared to be a boxing stance, leaving himself completely prone to a wrestling takedown, suggesting he had no idea how to defend himself.

Less than 30 seconds into the fight, Couture employed a primitive single-leg takedown, shooting in low and grabbing Toney’s ankle. The boxer fell backward in a clumsy pile, too slow and top-heavy to do anything.

“It’s pretty easy to counter,” Couture said of the single leg, noting that’s why you rarely see it in MMA. “A good grappler or a good wrestler is going to step out of that.”

Toney is neither. Once on his back, he was finished. Couture delivered some punches and elbows and eventually squeezed his neck until Toney quit rather than lose consciousness. Toney threw perhaps just one punch, a harmless, from-his-back effort.

“I didn’t feel like he demonstrated any real solid skills once he hit his back and butt,” Couture said. “He had no idea.”

Indeed he didn’t, which is why this boxing vs. MMA exhibition was mostly a farce. A young, athletic boxer who actually showed up in great condition would likely lose. Toney literally had no chance with his strategy and preparation.

Couture deemed the experiment “silly,” although he noted it would be the same if he tried to box. “James would probably knock me out in the first round.”

Probably, but it’s also likely a professional such as Couture would at least show up in shape. Toney’s body lacked definition and his stomach hung over his shorts. In MMA, where speed is a must, low body fat is imperative. Toney claimed he trained for eight months for the fight, but it barely showed.

“I’m sure he was prepared as he could’ve been,” White said. “Anyone who knows James Toney the last few years, James isn’t the most physically fit boxer.

“From the day we signed the fight in my office, he lost a lot of weight.”

That’s nice if you’re filming an episode of “The Biggest Loser.” As fights go, it was a joke. Boxing promoter Gary Shaw, a longtime rival of White’s, said Toney looked “like a very old man, slurred his words, and was non-competitive.”

“James Toney had less than a zero percent chance unless Randy had a heart attack from hearing the bell ring,” Shaw said Saturday night.

Shaw went on to call the pay-per-view a “sham,” which isn’t really true. This fight may have been, but White went to great lengths to build a fairly stacked card around it (not all the fights delivered, but on paper they looked good). Toney-Couture wasn’t the main event of the five-fight pay-per-view; Frankie Edgar defended his lightweight title against B.J. Penn in the headliner.

“I didn’t try to sell this as, ‘Tune in, you’ll see the most spectacular war,’ ” White said. “Anything can happen in a fight. … We’re not after boxing.”

And while such a sideshow didn’t speak well for MMA, what does it say for the state of boxing, that a 42-year-old James Toney is someone’s heavyweight champion?

Arguing boxing vs. mixed martial arts is a waste of time anyway. The UFC was founded, in part, to solve the age-old debate of which fighting discipline was best. UFC 1 featured a tournament won by Royce Gracie, a master of Brazilian jiu-jitsu. That was 1993. By 2010, a fighter with a command of just one discipline – no matter what it is – rarely lasts. It’s about being well-rounded and dangerous against a number of styles.

“Ninety-nine times out of 100 or 100 out of a 100, the MMA guy is going to win,” White said.

It’s why fights like these never need to be made, a problem compounded when the boxer shows up out of shape, unprepared and with no discernable strategy to do anything other than pray for a miracle punch to land.

James Toney collected a check Saturday night. Would’ve been nice if he’d made an attempt to earn it

Microsoft Co-founder Sues Apple, Google and Facebook

Microsoft Co-founder Paul Allen is suing Apple, Google, Facebook and eight other companies through his current firm, Interval Licensing LLC.

The lawsuit alleges that 11 different companies, including YouTubeYouTube, Netflix and AOL, have violated four different patents associated with web search and e-commerce.

As the Wall Street Journal notes, Interval Licensing LLC is a firm that holds IP developed at the now-defunct Interval Research. Interval Research was an incubator that Allen financed during the InternetInternet bubble of the late 1990s.

In a statement, Interval describes the patents at the center of the alleged infringements:

• United States Patent No. 6,263,507 issued for an invention entitled “Browser for Use in Navigating a Body of Information, With Particular Application to Browsing Information Represented By Audiovisual Data.”
• United States Patent No. 6,034,652 issued for an invention entitled “Attention Manager for Occupying the Peripheral Attention of a Person in the Vicinity of a Display Device.”
• United States Patent No. 6,788,314 issued for an invention entitled “Attention Manager for Occupying the Peripheral Attention of a Person in the Vicinity of a Display Device.”
• United States Patent No. 6,757,682 issued for an invention entitled “Alerting Users to Items of Current Interest.”

What is frustrating about this lawsuit, from an outsider’s perspective, is that the nature of these patents — while based in software and technology — also have clear ties to business methods. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court’s recent ruling in the Bilski case didn’t make the blurry lines between these two areas any more clear.

We’ll update this post with more information after we obtain the actual court filing from PACER.

[img credit: WikipediaWikipedia]

The legal action against Apple, Yahoo, Facebook, Google and eBay, as well as six other firms, asserts that web technologies first developed by Interval Licensing have been infringed.

The patents are key to how e-commerce and search websites worked, it says.

Google, Facebook and eBay immediately said they would fight the accusations.

"This lawsuit against some of America's most innovative companies reflects an unfortunate trend of people trying to compete in the courtroom instead of the marketplace," a Google spokesman said in a statement.

"Innovation - not litigation - is the way to bring to market the kinds of products and services that benefit millions of people around the world."

A Facebook spokesman called the action "completely without merit".

'Key technology'

In the suit filed in the US District Court in Washington on Friday, Interval said it was seeking damages and a halt to the alleged violations of its patents.

“Start Quote

We will do whatever is necessary. This is an important step”

End Quote David Postman Interval Licensing

The four patents concerned essentially involve using web browsers to find information; letting users know when items of interest appear; and enabling adverts, stock quotes, news update or video images to pop up on a computer screen while the user is engaged in another activity.

The company also alleges that it helped fund outside projects including research by Larry Page and Sergey Brin that resulted in Google.

The other companies named in the lawsuit are AOL, YouTube, Netflix, Office Depot, OfficeMax and Staples.

Interval does not name a precise figure for damages, but a spokesman told the BBC that it would be "determined as this progresses".

"We will do whatever is necessary. This is an important step. It is the first time that Paul Allen has filed a suit like this," David Postman said.

"Some of the technology developed by people working for Paul Allen a decade ago is now key to this search and e-commerce space. It is part of our daily life on the web and has shown itself to be of value to the industry today."

Patent activity

There has been a recent flurry of patent lawsuits involving Silicon Valley companies.

Apple, Nokia and HTC are involved in a long-running dispute over patent infringements involving smartphones.

Oracle has fired off its own legal action against Google, alleging that the search giant's Android mobile phone operating system infringed patents Oracle now holds for the open-source Java programming language, acquired through its purchase of Sun Microsystems.

There has also been an increase in people buying up companies to leverage the patent portfolio. But Mr Postman said that is not the case with Mr Allen's action.

"We are not asserting patents that other companies have filed, nor are we buying patent originally assigned to someone else. These are patents developed by and for Interval," he explained.

Mr Allen co-founded Microsoft with Bill Gates in 1975, and later started Interval in 1992. At its height, the company employed over 110 scientists, physicists and engineers.

The Wall Street Journal said among those who worked there were Robert Shaw, a co-creator of chaos theory; Max Mathews, who wrote the first widely used computer programme for music; and David Reed, one of the founders of the TCP/IP internet protocol.

Mr Allen, who made billions of dollars from his Microsoft shares, recently pledged most of his $31.5bn fortune to charity.

Last year, he revealed he had been diagnosed with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Migrants turn to the sea to enter US illegally

AP – U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents patrol from a speedboat near the California-Mexico border of …

By ELLIOT SPAGAT, Associated Press Writer Elliot Spagat, Associated Press Writer – Thu Aug 26, 1:08 pm ET

SAN DIEGO – The speedboat is about three miles offshore when a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent cuts the engine to drift on the current in quiet darkness, hoping for the telltale signs of immigrant smuggling — a motor's whirr or sulfur exhaust fumes.

"It's like trying to find a needle in a haystack, and the haystack is the Pacific Ocean," agent Tim Feige says, minutes before sunrise.

This is a new frontier for illegal immigrants entering the United States — a roughly 400-square-mile ocean expanse that stretches from a bullring on the shores of Tijuana, Mexico, to suburban Los Angeles.

In growing numbers, migrants are gambling their lives at sea as land crossings become even more arduous and likely to end in arrest. Sea interdictions and arrests have spiked year-over-year for three years, as enforcement efforts ramp up to meet the challenge.

While only a small fraction of border arrests are at sea, authorities say, heightened enforcement on land, and a bigger fence, is making the offshore route more attractive.

The number of Border Patrol agents doubled to more than 20,000 since 2003, and President Barack Obama is dispatching the National Guard after clamor for a crackdown in the desert led to Arizona's tough new immigration law.

"I think they found that going west through the ocean is probably their best bet," said Michael Carney, deputy special agent in charge of investigations for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in San Diego.

U.S. agents arrested 753 suspected illegal immigrants on Southern California shores and seas between October and Aug. 24, up from 400 the previous 12 months and 230 the year before. They spotted 85 watercraft since October, up from 49 during the previous 12 months and 33 the year before.

The smugglers use old, single-engine wooden vessels known in Mexico as "pangas." They're several feet wide and about 25 feet long. If they are found on U.S. waters, they're almost invariably smuggling people or drugs.

U.S. authorities have stepped up sea patrols near the border, forcing pangas loaded with illegal immigrants and sometimes with marijuana farther offshore with landings farther north.

An abandoned vessel was found in November in Laguna Beach, 85 miles north of Mexico. A boat with 24 people was found 43 miles off the San Diego coast in May.

Six boats have landed at Camp Pendleton Marine Corps base, more than 50 miles north of the border, since November, including two that were abandoned. The base, only a short hike to Interstate 5, has stepped up security.

Authorities believe smugglers put their passengers ashore and return to Mexico, when possible, to avoid losing their boats and leaving evidence behind. But they also quickly abandon the boats and run for it if they sense they're about to be caught.

Smuggling on California waters dates back to the alcohol trade during Prohibition, but authorities noticed a change in late 2007 when pangas began traveling without lights at night with up to 25 people packed on open decks.

At up to $5,000 a person — roughly twice the fee to cross illegally over land — one overnight trip can generate $100,000.

Some arrests at sea may be a result of heightened enforcement. This year, the Orange County Sheriff's Department joined in boat patrols on a 32-mile coastal stretch south of Los Angeles.

Only two immigrants are known to have been killed crossing in U.S. waters, their boat overturning in the San Diego surf in January. Two months earlier, eight were rescued atop an overturned boat that was adrift for a day.

Smugglers have been arrested on both sides of the border, with those in the U.S. being sentenced to a year or two in prison.

In Mexico, the boats launch from a poor fishing village named Popotla, about 15 miles south of the border. It sits between Playa de Rosarito's high-rise hotels and condos that cater to American tourists and expatriates and next to the studio where the 1997 blockbuster "Titanic" was filmed.

Squatters live in about two dozen shanties crammed on a hillside. There is no electricity, paved road, sewage or garbage collection.

But it is easy to understand why smugglers are drawn to the village. It's out of view from the highway only 200 yards away. Its crescent-shaped beach invites gentle waves and it is the only public boat launching spot on a 50-mile stretch south of the border.

A restaurant worker, Victor Estrada, said he saw about eight migrants being led to a boat on the beach one recent night after they waited several hours inside a sports utility vehicle, but about a dozen other workers and residents insisted they knew nothing about smugglers.

Jose Eduardo Montero, public safety chief of Playas de Rosarito, offers a different view: "The place is invaded by criminals, drug traffickers, undocumented immigrants, drug dealers. It's all mixed in with the fishing business."

One January night, Montero said, his officers detained 23 people as they were preparing for a crossing, including two alleged guides who were arrested on smuggling charges.

Authorities have failed to pierce the top ranks of smuggling organizations. Boat drivers offer little information when captured and toss their GPS devices and radios into the water before agents reach them.

The low-slung boats, when weighed down with people, can float only about one foot above water, making them difficult to see on radar. Night-vision binoculars have limited reach.

"They're beating us with low-tech," said ICE's Carney. "I'm not saying they can't be detected, but I'm saying they're very hard to detect."

On a recent night off San Diego shores, two CBP speedboats prowled the coast. A CBP helicopter with infrared surveillance equipment was down for repairs, which happens pretty often, said CBP supervisory agent Mark White, his boat idled with Tijuana's lights behind him.

"We're one step behind," he says.

White spent much of the night near two unlit beaches that are popular with smugglers. He described the positioning as educated guesswork. Just because boats have been landing north, he can't afford to neglect beaches close to the border. Some migrants dash one mile from Tijuana on Jet Skis, hugging the shore.

"We're trying to smell, we're trying to see, and we're waiting," White said.

Agents got lucky the following night, arresting 23 suspected illegal immigrants from Mexico on a boat about five miles offshore from San Diego's tony La Jolla area around 3 a.m.

Are E-Books Worth the Money?

(Getty Images)

If you walk out of the cinema this week with a burning desire to read Elizabeth Gilbert's "Eat, Pray, Love," you can download it onto your Amazon Kindle electronic book reader — if you have one—for $12.99.

Then again you could just walk into your local Borders bookstore with a coupon and get the paperback for $10.

Barnes & Noble will charge you $12.99 to read the book on its e-book reader, the Nook. But it's only $9.36 (shipping may cost you extra) if you order the paperback at bn.com.

As a society, we have gadget-itis. No new machine that goes ping goes unsung. People stand in line for hours to purchase an iPhone barely distinguishable from the one already in their pockets. Amazon's newest Kindles sold out within days of going on sale. (Those who bought quickly will receive theirs this week.)

E-book readers are booming. Amazon (AMZN - News) says in the past few months sales of e-books have zoomed past sales of the paper ones. While e-books are still in an early stage—the Association of American Publishers says that so far this year they account for 8% of consumer books, compared to just 3% in 2009—the growth rate is dramatic. (This is one of the problems besetting Barnes & Noble, which has just announced a quarterly loss following a decline in sales of traditional books.)

[See The Best Android Phones on the Market]

Beyond all the hype, are e-book readers a good deal? Are they worth the money? If so, how can you get the maximum return on your investment?

Here are six money tips for pennywise book lovers.

1. Casual readers probably shouldn't bother.

The median American book-buyer purchases just seven books a year, according to an AP-Ipsos poll in 2007.

An e-book reader right now typically costs about $150 (more on this below). Even if you save a couple of bucks per book by downloading them onto your e-book reader, the payback isn't going to be much for the casual reader. If you saved $5 a book, you'd have to buy 30 just to earn back your initial investment. If you only saved $2 a book, you'd have to buy 75.

I don't want to sound negative. I happen to think e-book readers are great. But that's because I read books avidly. (I've been known to take 10 books on a beach holiday.) If you are in my camp, e-book readers let you carry a library in your pocket or bag. But if you're a casual reader, they probably don't make much economic sense yet. (On the other hand, once you buy an e-book reader you will probably buy and read more books.)

2. The books aren't as cheap as they should be.

E-books are far, far cheaper to produce, distribute and sell than paper ones. There is no paper, no printing, no trucking and no retail space.

So they should cost a lot less to buy, but the deal often isn't anywhere near as good as it should be. Amazon has tried to drive prices for best sellers down to $9.99, but the publishing industry has fought back. A lot of best sellers go for $12.99 instead. That may be cheaper than the hardbacks, but the gap should be wider.

As in the case of Elizabeth Gilbert's runaway success, you may sometimes find the traditional version cheaper. Looking for Stieg Larsson's "The Girl Who Played With Fire"? It's $7.99 on the Kindle. I bought it in Borders, with a coupon, for $5.68.

Books are cheaper in electronic format, but not all.

3. Savvy readers read the classics anyway.

Why? Because they're free. From Aesop to "Zarathustra." From "Hamlet" to "Huckleberry Finn." They won't cost you a penny. These books are outside of copyright. Just go to Gutenberg.org and download them. Thousands of them. And they're better than most of the stuff published more recently anyway.

4. Be aware of the potential costs of buying a Kindle.

Amazon sells the best-selling e-book reader. It's a great product, very easy to use—much easier, I've found, than the competition. But Amazon has given the device a cellular connection and a keyboard so you can access its online bookstore any time, any place, to buy a book. Good for them. Not so good for you. The results are predictable: You may end up making lots of impulse purchases. Don't be surprised if you spend hundreds of dollars on books in your first year. (Amazon now sells a Kindle that only has a Wi-Fi connection instead of cellular. This may save you money, as the connection will only work in a Wi-Fi hot spot. By the time you've found one, you may have decided you don't want the book.)

5. Be aware of the costs of the rivals.

The main ones are time and hassle. The many rivals to the Kindle generally use a software platform from Adobe, and it can be a pain. Even worse: Adobe provides only very basic help if things go wrong. In extremis, you may find yourself emailing India. I asked Adobe why this was. A spokesman explained that because Adobe Digital Editions was given away for free, the company only provides "a baseline level of support, which is web-based," he says. This includes "an active user forum"—in other words asking other customers how to solve your problems. Good luck with that.

If you can overcome that problem, rivals do offer benefits that may save you money. First, they let you shop around for e-books at different online bookstores, and many run promotions. Second, they will let you borrow some e-books online from your local library. Third, many of them come without any wireless connection whatsoever. That means fewer impulse purchases.

6. And if you're thinking of buying a book reader—wait!

At least, hold off for a month or two or maybe even a few weeks. Prices simply have to come down. They may do so fast.

Amazon's first Kindles went on sale three years ago for $399. Its latest versions, out this week, start at just $139. That's cheaper than rivals. They're going to have to respond.

There's an upgrade cycle going on as well. E Ink Corp., the company that makes most of the screens, has developed a newer version with somewhat sharper contrast. (Handy if you're reading fine print, but not so important for most books).

In a rational market, we should see big price cuts this fall, especially as the last of the old models go on sale. Of course, that's in a rational market. Let me know if you ever find one.

Write to Brett Arends at brett.arends@wsj.com