What exactly is the point these capering pinheads think they have made? This paper doesn't support YEC. It doesn't support a global flood. It doesn't support intelligent design, specified complexity, 'genetic entropy', created kinds or a 6000 year old earth. It suggests that a certain site is less suitable for dating than previously thought, and in particular what were previously thought to be evidences of post-Permian ecosystem recovery
may be Permian in origin. In light of these facts the authors warn that
South African models of
terrestrial extinction may have to be modified, and caution should be used when extrapolating this data to other locations.
Notable things this paper does NOT do: question the P-T extinction event itself or the absolute age of the P-T extinction event.
So what is their point? Is this just the thing where nutters throw a giant flapdoodle whenever scientists disagree over something vaguely related to the nutters' nuttery?