Abstract

We welcome comments by Brook et al. (1), supporters of human-driven models, on our review of the role of climate in Pleistocene faunal extinctions in Sahul (Pleistocene Australia–New Guinea) (2). In response, we begin on a point of agreement: the fossil fauna record on which our respective arguments are based is sparse, although our understanding of Pleistocene environmental conditions is improving (3⇓–5). However, we also flag a basic point of difference. Unlike Brook et al., who focus on the ∼50 extinct Australian species (an artificial distinction because Australia was part of the larger landmass Sahul) and the 50 ka since human arrival, we consider the bigger picture, …

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.