Faith writes:
The iridium suggests that there was a meteorite hit that caused the dispersion of this element. This too seems empirically justified.
What empirical justification are you talking about?
According to
Scott Rowland, "Iridium is not very common on Earth, but it is proposed to be more abundant in asteroids and meteorites. "
Do you think a 'proposal' is empirical justification? You seem to be accepting theories on the basis of faith as your name suggests.
According to him, "Basaltic volcanoes, such as those here in Hawai'i produce iridium... "
"Tschudy and others (1984) and Pillmore and Flores (1984) placed the Cretaceous/Tertiary (K/T) boundary near the top of the lower coal-rich interval below the sandstone-dominated interval in the lower part of the Raton Formation. The K/T boundary is based on the discovery of an iridium anomaly at the palynological Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary"
- quote from
A SUMMARY OF TERTIARY COAL RESOURCES OF THE RATON BASIN, COLORADO AND NEW MEXICO
Dinosaur footprints have been closely associated with coal beds. This iridium anomaly too is close to coal beds. The fact that sand is abundant in these coal beds imply that the forests were in the process of being buried.
Depending on how the complex flow of underground water, seawater, rainwater and lavas sorted and buried everything, that's how we got our strata.
If someone wants to prove that iridium comes from meteors, here's a suggestion:
Measure the iridium concentration at several distances from the impact center. If the iridium concentration gradually decreases as we move out further from the crater, then there is proof that iridium is indeed from meteors.
™ Version 4.2