> older things are more difficult to find so absence of evidence is not (strong) evidence of absence.

I agree but I'd expect some sort of logrithm though. But perhaps not.

As per the article Australia had the extinctions which line up with an earlier time period.

And as per the article evidently it's not PC to imply humans did it. There's more than science going on here.

I just want a real independent expert to comment not someone with an agenda like PoP.