[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Precisely Dating The KT Boundary

Is the global Iridium layer unique? If so, I suggest "IL" as a substitute for 
"K/T" to avoid future modifications to stratigraphic nomenclature. Or, if not 
unique, but sufficiently unusual, then "IL1, 2, 3...". This assumes of course 
that no forward-looking scientists are going to change the names of the 


----- Original Message ----
From: T. Michael Keesey <keesey@gmail.com>
To: DINOSAUR Mailing List <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2006 10:38:46 AM
Subject: Re: Precisely Dating The KT Boundary

On 9/7/06, Jerry D. Harris <jharris@dixie.edu> wrote:
> Now,
> for the Cenozoic, there are only the Paleogene (Paleocene-Oligocene) and
> Neogene (Miocene-Recent).  Thus, there is no more K/T boundary -- there is
> only the K/P boundary.

I thought "P" was for "Permian". Wouldn't it be the K/Pg boundary? (Or
why not just the M/C boundary?)
T. Michael Keesey
The Dinosauricon: http://dino.lm.com
Parry & Carney: http://parryandcarney.com