[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
re: length of Cambrian vs. Cretaceous
On Tony Fiorillo's comment:
Well, actually, no. The Cretaceous was significantly longer. The base of the
Cambrian has been considerbly "younged" and is maximally recognized at
558 MA, with some workers placing the "golden spike" in the Lena River
section in Siberia, the proposed stratotype, as young as ca. 538 MA.
THis is really screwing up the relative early-middle-late Cambrian
concepts. Nevertheless, the Cretaceous was significantly of longer
duration--forget 570MA as the base of thje Cambrian.