Ethan is supposed to be a scientist, he plays on emotions.
Michael Kelly

You either intentionally lie or are misinformed by deniers’ writings: the Chicxulub impact is the cause for the K–T extinction extinction (killed the dinosaurs, 66 million years ago), whereas the Siberian Traps are suspected to be related to the P–T extinction (the “Great Dying”, about 252 million years ago). The difference is almost 200 million years between them. Even much worse: the P–T extinction was immensely huge, and the CO2 concentrations were not more than around 1000 ppm, dangerously close to what’s achievable in 2100 AD (and, moreover, the climate response to CO2 is definitely not always linear like in your wrong simplification, the “tipping points” do exist):

Atmospheric CO2 concentrations during ancient greenhouse climates were similar to those predicted for A.D. 2100:

“The relatively low ½CO2 atm of 1,000 ppmV during greenhouse episodes suggest that either Mesozoic warmth was partially caused by a factor unrelated to CO2 or that the Earth’s climate is much more sensitive to atmospheric CO2 than previously thought. Comparison of projected future ½CO2 atm (2) with results from the recalibrated CO2 paleobarometer (Fig. 2B) indicate atmospheric CO2 may reach levels similar to those prevailing during the vegetated Earth’s hottest greenhouse episodes by A.D. 2100.”

You wrote: “Everyone has seen the TV specials on the Chicxulub meteor impact which (it is debated) caused or coincided with the Siberian Traps (a 10,000 km square lava flow).” I haven’t, it’s totally wrong, and you should absolutely not believe such stupidity where somebody mixes 200 million years separated events. And you should even less use the stupidity to to unjustly attack the real scientists or to use it to support your beliefs already unsupported by science.

I’m attempting to give you the real scientific details only because you write that you are “working on a geology degree” but your claims are way below that level of understanding at the moment and it wouldn’t be worth trying based only on them. You can’t learn any science watching the TV specials.

A single golf clap? Or a long standing ovation?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.