RE: Snails in the Loess

Pim van Meurs (entheta@eskimo.com)
Fri, 11 Sep 1998 07:33:31 -0700

Janet: << In a recent posting in response to something I
wrote, Pim van Meurs chided me for not taking proper
note of data offered by Glenn Morton concerning the
distribution of snails in the loess. I meant to post a
reply, but now I can't find Pim's article. I may have
deleted it inadvertently, so I'll have to define a new
subject for this purpose.
The gist of his posting was that (according to
data cited by Morton) the various varieties of snails
in the loess are distributed (in relation to rivers,
etc.) exactly as one would expect according to the
uniformitarian model. He then challenged me to explain
that fact in the light of Petersen's theory.>>

The fact remains that the distribution pattern of the fluvial and forrest snail types is exactly what would be expected when taking into account the geographical location.

Janet: << Well, of course, I can't. I would question the
evidence instead. Certainly I do not suggest that
Morton shaded the data (or the interpretation thereof)
in order to make an agreeable point, but that unseemly
parctice is not unknown, the pressure on authors in
academia being what it is.>>

Another 'pseudo scientific' argument by appealing to 'ad hominem' references, however indirect and thinly veiled. Janet, you not only have shown to be unable to address the scientific issues using the scientific method but you also have to resort to a form of argument which is plainly incorrect.

Janet: << A paper cited by Petersen on
Page 141 offers a case in point. Here Skertchly and
Kingsmill describe certain great limey slabs lying on
the loess in China as "old river gravels". Some of
those conglomerate slabs were hundreds of yards long
and up to 30 yards wide. They were scattered at
various elevations on the hillsides and oriented at
random. Some of them even projected like shelves from
the loess. The above authors, presumably to curry favor
with a thesis committee or a referee, avoided the
obvious and offered these slabes as the bed of an old
river--an implausible interpretation, in my opinion,
but one at least in some measure agreeable to the
Uniformity Principle.
I wonder if either van Meurs or Morton would care to comment on those "old river gravels".>>

Perhaps you could first tell us why you consider their explanation 'implausibe', other than through a reference to possible improper actions and behavior of the researchers ?

-----== Sent via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Easy access to 50,000+ discussion forums