Quick
Search: 
 
advanced search
 GSW Home    GeoRef Home    My GSW Alerts    Contact GSW    About GSW    Journals List    Help 
AAPG Bulletin SEARCH
JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

AAPG Bulletin; June 2006; v. 90; no. 6; p. 975-982; DOI: 10.1306/12130505142
© 2006 American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG)
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Friedman, G. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

DISCUSSION AND REPLY

Climatic significance of Holocene beachrock sites along shorelines of the Red Sea: Reply

Gerald M. Friedman1

1 Northeastern Science Foundation, Inc., Rensselaer Center of Applied Geology, 15 Third Street, P.O. Box 746, Troy, New York 12181-0746; gmfriedman@juno.com

The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below.

Mozley and Burns' (2006) discussion reminds me of current discussions on paleotemperature elsewhere. In the July 29, 2005, issue of Science, the following statements are presented: "Two teams of researchers, studying the same evidence with the same techniques, have painted diametrically opposite pictures of a key period in the history of Earth's climate, which climatologists are probing...It's a tough issue to sort out...‘What's at stake is the regional distribution of climate,’ both past and future" (Kerr, 2005, p. 687). We have to wait for more data. This is difficult work, and it is easy to be misled.

Before answering specific criticism, please note that my study was a geologic note and not a full article. My detailed article (Friedman, 2004) was published as part of a special publication series requested by the Geochemical Society as part of its tribute to Isaac R. Kaplan. I refer Mozley and Burns (2006) to the details of my article.

I shall answer their criticism.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PETROGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLES

The studied beachrock is composed of (1) terrigenous debris derived from nearby bedrock, (2) carbonate particles of local origin, and (3) carbonate cement (Friedman, 1988; Table 1).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1 X-Ray Diffraction Mineralogical Analysis*

 
The most common beachrock lithology is terrigenous calcipebblestone (Figure 1) and calcisandstone in which skeletal debris is minor or absent, terrigenous rock fragments are dominant, and carbonate cement is abundant. Terrigenous debris does not affect radiocarbon dating nor carbon or strontium isotopic measurements because in most of the samples, the debris does not generally contain carbonates. The samples selected for the study contain fossils only sporadically, or at best, fossils are entirely absent.


Figure Removed (Available Only in the Full Text)
View larger version (141K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 1 Beachrock with abundant included terrigenous pebbles paving intertidal zone and extending into supratidal zone on the west side of the Gulf of Aqaba.

 
Terrigenous particles in the . . . [Full Text of this Article]







JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2009 by American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG)