Patterns, processes and models – an analytical review of current ambiguous interpretations of the evidence for pre-Pleistocene glaciations

IF 0.9 Q3 GEOLOGY
Mats O. Molén
{"title":"Patterns, processes and models – an analytical review of current ambiguous interpretations of the evidence for pre-Pleistocene glaciations","authors":"Mats O. Molén","doi":"10.14746/logos.2023.29.3.15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Models (paradigms) and former interpretations have often been presupposed when conducting field research. In the 19th century diamictites were for the first time interpreted to have originated from ancient glaciations. These interpretations have to a large part prevailed in the geological community, although there has been much progress in the areas of sedimentology, glaciology and physical geography. The present work is an effort to find criteria which most clearly discriminate between geological features produced by different processes, mainly glaciation and mass flow, the latter predominantly sediment gravity flows. Geological features which have been interpreted to have formed by glaciation throughout pre-Pleistocene Earth history are compared to similar-appearing geological features formed by mass flow and tectonics, so as to uncover variations in the appearance between features resulting from these different processes. The starting point for this comparison is documentation of the appearance of Quaternary products of erosion and deposition, in order to discern the origin of older formations. It is shown that the appearance and origin of pavements, dropstones, valleys, small-scale landforms, surface microtextures and most other geological features may in some cases be equivocal, but in others the details are indicative of the process which generated the feature. Detailed geological field data which have been compiled by geologists from outcrops of pre-Pleistocene strata, more often than is considered in most papers, commonly point to a mass flow origin, mainly a sediment gravity flow origin, rather than a glaciogenic origin. A process of multiple working hypotheses or interpretations is therefore advocated, based mainly on a comparison of the appearance of features formed by different geological processes documented from different research disciplines. Instead of starting with current interpretations or models, this multiple working hypothesis or methodology helps to avoid confirmation bias and jumping to conclusions.","PeriodicalId":44833,"journal":{"name":"Geologos","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geologos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14746/logos.2023.29.3.15","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Models (paradigms) and former interpretations have often been presupposed when conducting field research. In the 19th century diamictites were for the first time interpreted to have originated from ancient glaciations. These interpretations have to a large part prevailed in the geological community, although there has been much progress in the areas of sedimentology, glaciology and physical geography. The present work is an effort to find criteria which most clearly discriminate between geological features produced by different processes, mainly glaciation and mass flow, the latter predominantly sediment gravity flows. Geological features which have been interpreted to have formed by glaciation throughout pre-Pleistocene Earth history are compared to similar-appearing geological features formed by mass flow and tectonics, so as to uncover variations in the appearance between features resulting from these different processes. The starting point for this comparison is documentation of the appearance of Quaternary products of erosion and deposition, in order to discern the origin of older formations. It is shown that the appearance and origin of pavements, dropstones, valleys, small-scale landforms, surface microtextures and most other geological features may in some cases be equivocal, but in others the details are indicative of the process which generated the feature. Detailed geological field data which have been compiled by geologists from outcrops of pre-Pleistocene strata, more often than is considered in most papers, commonly point to a mass flow origin, mainly a sediment gravity flow origin, rather than a glaciogenic origin. A process of multiple working hypotheses or interpretations is therefore advocated, based mainly on a comparison of the appearance of features formed by different geological processes documented from different research disciplines. Instead of starting with current interpretations or models, this multiple working hypothesis or methodology helps to avoid confirmation bias and jumping to conclusions.
模式、过程和模型--对目前关于上新世前冰川证据的模糊解释的分析性审查
摘要 在进行实地研究时,往往会预先假定模式(范式)和以前的解释。19 世纪,人们首次将二迭石解释为源自古代冰川。尽管在沉积学、冰川学和自然地理学领域取得了很大进展,但这些解释在很大程度上仍在地质学界占据主导地位。目前的工作是努力寻找能够最清楚地区分由不同过程(主要是冰川作用和大规模流动,后者主要是沉积重力流)产生的地质特征的标准。在整个更新世之前的地球历史中,被解释为由冰川作用形成的地质特征与由大规模流动和构造作用形成的外观相似的地质特征进行了比较,以揭示这些不同过程所产生的地质特征在外观上的差异。这种比较的出发点是记录第四纪侵蚀和沉积产物的外观,以辨别更古老地层的起源。结果表明,路面、落石、山谷、小规模地貌、地表微纹理和大多数其他地质特征的外观和起源在某些情况下可能是模棱两可的,但在其他情况下,其细节则表明了产生该特征的过程。地质学家从早更新世之前的地层露头处收集到的详细野外地质数据,比大多数论文所考虑的要多得多,这些数据通常都指向大规模流动的起源,主要是沉积重力流的起源,而不是冰川形成的起源。因此,我们主张采用多种工作假设或解释的方法,主要是对不同研究学科记录的不同地质过程所形成的地貌进行比较。这种多重工作假设或方法有助于避免确认偏差和匆忙下结论,而不是从当前的解释或模型入手。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Geologos
Geologos GEOLOGY-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信