Lyell Collection

Journal of the Geological Society

Lyell Centre  |   Lyell Collection  |   Subscriptions   |   Geological Society  |   Email alerts  |   Online bookshop  |   Help


Keywords:
Author:
Advanced search>>
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Journal of the Geological Society; 1971; v. 127; issue.4; p. 375;
DOI: 10.1144/gsjgs.127.4.0375
© 1971 Geological Society of London

DISCUSSION

Written reply to Dr WALSH by Dr BLUNDELL: The division of Layers 1 and 2 into Neogene and Palaeogene does not depend on any supposition of the age of the post-Liassic sediments of the Mochras bore-hole. Although comparisons are made in the paper, it should be emphasized that the reflection characteristics of the stratified sequence of Layer 1 in St. George's Channel and of Layer 2 both differ from the Mochras sediments and even if they are of about the same age they are likely to have different lithologies.

...

This 250-word extract was created in the absence of an abstract.