| [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Thread Index] | [Date Prev] | [Date Next] | [Date Index] |
|
Andy,
Only very few portions of the Haq et al sea level
curve may be considered accurate. Many lines of evidence released over the
past 15 years confidently point out the numerous flaws in the development of the
Haq curve. The reality is, teasing out a global eustatic curve from the
plethora of basins around the world at any time increment requires tremendous
data support that is lacking for most portions of the Haq curve. Eustasy
is often overprinted by tectonic or climatic signals (or combinations
thereof). Further, the biostratigraphic dating of many of the eustatic
cycles is not sufficiently refined to correlate events globally at the time
scales that Haq et al claim.
Those who still employ the Haq curve may cite the
few portions that are backed by excellent biostratigraphic control as well as
comprehensive regional geologic data from each basin contributing a particular
cycle. But be warned, most cycles lack a global comprehensive data set to
back a eustatic mechanism for sea level changes within a particular basin.
Finally, to answer your question. A sea level
curve of the approximate frequency of the Haq curve (1 to 10 Ma) doesn't
exist.
Hope that helps.
Kevin Gostlin
University of Toronto
|
Partial index: