The Journal of Geology, January-February 1893: A Semi-Quarterly Magazine of Geology and Related SciencesVarious
Science
The Journal of Geology, January-February 1893: A Semi-Quarterly Magazine of Geology and Related Sciences
Various
Geology -- Periodicals
If there have been differences of opinion concerning the nature of ice
epochs, as distinct from each other and from ice periods, there has
been a failure to adequately apprehend the nature, the extent, and the
meaning of the real criteria on which the final recognition of separate
ice epochs, if such there were, must be based.
Such criteria are several in number. They are of unequal value. In some
instances a single one of them might be quite sufficient to establish
the fact of two ice epochs. In other cases, single criteria which might
not be in themselves demonstrative, have great corroborative weight,
when found in association with others. In all cases, much discretion
must be used in the interpretation of these criteria. They may be
enumerated under several specific heads.
(1) _Forest Beds._ Beds of vegetal deposits or old soils are frequently
found between layers of glacial drift. This is one of the criteria
most commonly cited, because it is of common occurrence and easy of
recognition. The advocates of the unity of the glacial period maintain
that such beds of organic matter might become interbedded with morainic
debris during minor oscillations of the ice's edge. The phenomena of
existing glaciers make it evident that forest beds or soils might
be enclosed by the deposits of an oscillating ice edge. By repeated
oscillations of the ice's edge during the general retreat of the ice,
such vegetal beds might become interstratified with glacial drift more
or less frequently over all the area once covered by the ice, and from
which it has now disappeared. The mere presence of vegetable material
between beds of drift is therefore no proof of distinct ice epochs.
This does not destroy the value of the vegetal beds as a criterion for
the recognition of distinct ice epochs, but it makes caution necessary
in its application. It does not follow that, since _some_ inter-drift
forest-beds do not prove interglacial epochs, _none_ do. The question
is not how forest-beds might originate, but how existing forest-beds
did originate.
Where the plant-remains found in the relations indicated are so well
preserved as to make identification of the species possible, we have
a means of determining, with some degree of accuracy, the climatic
conditions which must have obtained at the place where the plants grew
during the time of their life. If these interbedded plant-remains are
of such a character as to indicate a temperate climate, we can not
suppose that they grew at the immediate edge of the ice, and therefore
that they were buried beneath its oscillating margin. To be specific,
if the inter-drift plant remains in any given locality of the area
once covered by ice are such as to indicate a climate _as warm as the
present in the same locality_, the ice must have receded so far to the
northward that its re-advance might, in our judgment, appropriately be
regarded as a separate ice epoch.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account