I hope that your reaction is because the headline is way more sensational (to the extent of probably being incorrect) than the actual paper's abstract (https://

I hope that your reaction is because the headline is way more sensational (to the extent of probably being incorrect) than the actual paper's abstract (https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2408721121 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2408721121) Here's what the actual paper says: > [...] Thus, the S2 impact likely had regional, if not global, positive and negative effects on life. The tsunami, atmospheric heating, and darkness would likely have decimated phototrophic microbes in the shallow water column. However, the biosphere likely recovered rapidly, and, in the medium term, the increase in nutrients and iron likely facilitated microbial blooms, especially of iron-cycling microbes. Which sounds and - if I understand it correctly - means something kinda different than how "reset early life" is ordinarily understood, huh.