A successful symposium of ``multi origin of soft sediment deformation structures and seismites

A successful symposium of ``Multi origin of soft sediment deformation structures and seismites'''''''' w sciencedirect com Journal of Palaeogeography, 2017, 6(1) 1e6 (00109) Available online at ww ScienceDi[.]

Journal of Palaeogeography, 2017, 6(1): 1e6 (00109) Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect journal homepage: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-palaeogeography/ Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites A successful symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites” Zeng-Zhao Feng China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing 100083, China Abstract A great progress has been made in researches of soft-sediment deformation structures (SSDS) and seismites in China However, the research thought was not open-minded About the origin of SSDS, it was almost with one viewpoint, i.e., almost all papers published in journals of China considered the beds with SSDS as seismites It is not a good phenomenon In order to change this phenomenon, in early 2016, Feng et al wrote a paper “Researches of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites in China d A brief review” as “to cast a brick to attract the jade”, emailed this paper to many geologists in China and other countries, and invited them to write papers for the symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites” “The seismite problem” by Prof G Shanmugam is the first paper that we have received The symposium was successfully held in September 24, 2016 at Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo, Henan Province, China The products of this symposium are as follows: (1) The terms “SSDS” and “Multi-origin of SSDS” were accepted by numerous geologists (2) The definition of seismites by Seilacher (1969), i.e., “fault-graded beds interpreted as seismites”, should be obsoleted, however, the definition by many geologists today, i.e., “the seismites are the beds with SSDS really induced by earthquakes”, should not be obsoleted and should be retained (3) The term “seismites” should be strictly restricted to the beds with SSDS that are really induced by earthquakes (4) The clastic injections are also with multi-origin, and they cannot definitely be the seismites and may not be the exact criteria of in-situ earthquakes (5) The most important product of this symposium is that the phenomenon of almost one viewpoint of the researches of SSDS and seismites in China has been Changed eventually Keywords Soft-sediment deformation structures (SSDS), Seismites, Clastic injections, Symposium, Practice © 2017 China University of Petroleum (Beijing) Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V on behalf of China University of Petroleum (Beijing) This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Received 11 October 2016; accepted November 2016; available online xxx E-mail address: jpalaeo2012@163.com Peer review under responsibility of China University of Petroleum (Beijing) http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jop.2016.11.002 2095-3836/© 2017 China University of Petroleum (Beijing) Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V on behalf of China University of Petroleum (Beijing) This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Please cite this article in press as: Feng, Z.-Z., A successful symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites”, Journal of Palaeogeography (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jop.2016.11.002 Z.-Z Feng Introduction The symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites” was successfully held on September 24, 2016, at the 14th National Conference of Palaeogeography and Sedimentology held during September 23e25, 2016, at Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo, Henan Province, China The symposium received Chinese full text papers in which one paper has been published in the Journal of Palaeogeography (Chinese Edition), Vol 18, No 5, 2016; and English full text papers in which papers have been published in the Journal of Palaeogeography, Vol 5, No 4, 2016 There are 10 papers orally presented at the symposium More than 200 geologists attended the symposium It is the first symposium about “Soft-sediment deformation structures (SSDS) and seismites” in China, and it is likely to make the most important influence on the researches of SSDS and seismites in China and other countries Why did we organize this symposium? It is necessary for the researches of SSDS and seismites in China During the past 30 years (1987e2016), a great progress has been made in researches of SSDS and seismites in China However, the research thought was not open-minded About the origin of SSDS, it was almost with one viewpoint, i.e., almost all the papers published in journals of China considered the beds with SSDS as seismites It is not a good phenomenon In order to change the phenomenon of one viewpoint, in early 2016, Feng et al wrote a paper “Researches of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites in China d A brief review” (Feng et al., 2016) as “to cast a brick to attract the jade”, emailed this paper to many geologists in China and other countries, and invited them to write papers for the symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites”, to orally present their papers at the symposium, and to discuss the problems of SSDS and seismites The excellent papers will be published in the Journal of Palaeogeography (Chinese Edition and English Edition) Our proposal has got active responses from geologists in China and other countries, and we have received many papers “The seismite problem” by Prof G Shanmugam is the first paper that we have received from those geologists invited by us At the beginning of the symposium, I presented: (1) 100 copies of Vol 5, No of the Journal of Palaeogeography, which included the article “Researches of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites in China d A brief review” by Feng et al (2016), the article “The seismite problem” by Shanmugam (2016), and two articles “Seismites resulting from highfrequency, high-magnitude earthquakes in Latvia caused by Late Glacial glacio-isostatic uplift” and “The response of stromatolites to seismic shocks: Tomboliths from the Palaeoproterozoic Chaibasa Formation, E India” by Van Loon et al (2016a, 2016b); (2) 100 copies of Vol 18, No of the Journal of Palaeogeography (Chinese Edition), which included the article “Records of the Pleistocene seismic events in Tancheng Maipo, Shandong Province” by Zhang et al (2016); (3) 50 copies of the Chinese version of “Researches of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites in China d A brief review” by Feng et al.; (4) 50 copies of the Chinese version of “The seismite problem” written by Shanmugam and translated by Feng and Liu; (5) 50 copies of the Chinese version of “Preface of the Chinese version of the seismite problem” by Feng, to participants as references of my keynote speech of the symposium Criticisms and corrections are heartily welcome Practice is the sole criterion for testing truth Tse-Tung Mao (Mao, 1937) said: “Many theories of natural science are held to be truth not only because they were so considered when natural scientists originated them, but because they have been verified in subsequent scientific practice … … The history of human knowledge tells us that the truth of many theories is incomplete and that this incompleteness is remedied through the test of practice Many theories are erroneous and it is through the test of practice that their errors corrected That is why practice is the criterion of truth” Xiao-Ping Deng (Deng, 1982) further said: “Practice is the sole criterion for testing truth” The task of the symposium is that we should utilize our practice during the 47 years (in the world) and 30 years (in China) to test whether the definitions, formation processes, and origin theories of SSDS, seismites, 震积岩 (Zhenjiyan), clastic injections are complete and correct or not If the theories are incomplete or erroneous, we should remedy them After the symposium, our knowledge will be tested again by the geological practice in China and other countries It is the process of “practice, knowledge, again practice, and again knowledge” (Mao, 1937) I believe that the definitions, formation processes and origin theories of SSDS, seismites, 震积岩 (Zhenjiyan), clastic Please cite this article in press as: Feng, Z.-Z., A successful symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites”, Journal of Palaeogeography (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jop.2016.11.002 A successful symposium injections, i.e., the truth of them, will be clearer and much clearer through the process of “practice, knowledge, again practice, and again knowledge” Knowledge of the symposium The symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites” is very successful Definitely, it is a symposium of “a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend” A great multitude of geologists, not only in the symposium, but also before and after the symposium, put forward many reviews, criticisms and suggestions, to my keynote speech and the papers, such as “Researches of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites in China d A brief review”, “The seismite problem” (Chinese version), “Preface of the Chinese version of the seismite problem”, etc Among these reviews, criticisms and suggestions, there are not only agreement and appreciation, but also disagreement and opposition Now, I sum up these different viewpoints of the symposium as the following, and heartily welcome more reviews, criticisms and corrections from all geologists in China and other countries Certainly, knowledge of this symposium will be tested again by the geological practice in China and other countries in the future 3.1 Soft-sediment deformation structures (SSDS) “SSDS” is a term of structures of sedimentary petrology It is a descriptive term Numerous geologists have accepted the term, and therefore this term can be used continually “Multi-origin of SSDS” is a general knowledge about the origin of SSDS Numerous geologists have agreed with the conception, and therefore this genetic term can be used continually Above two points are the important common views of the symposium 3.2 Two definitions of seismites 3.2.1 Definition of seismites by Seilacher (1969) “Seismites” is a genetic term introduced by Seilacher (1969) The original definition of this term by Seilacher (1969) is “fault-graded beds interpreted as seismites” This term “seismites” introduced by Seilacher (1969) is inherently problematic (1) The “4 fault-graded beds” is not “graded beds”, because the “4 zones” (adSoupy zone; bdRubble zone; cdSegmented zone; ddUndisturbed sediment, from top to bottom) are not “graded beds” Seilacher (1969) has not introduced any evidence of earthquakes for the “4 zones”, i.e., the “4 fault-graded beds” A great multitude of geologists worldwide have not accepted the “4 zones”, i.e., the “4 fault-graded beds” till now (2) In the neighboring places of the outcrop that Seilacher (1969) studied, other geologists have discovered many sandwiched folded beds, but they are unrelated to earthquakes “The seismite problem” by Shanmugam (2016) put forward a rigorous challenge to the term “seismites” introduced by Seilacher (1969) and even negated it Please see “1.1 The seismite problem” and “2.3 The genesis of the term seismites” in Shanmugam's paper I agree with Shanmugam's viewpoint 3.2.2 Definition of seismites by many geologists today Today, there is another definition of seismites by many geologists in China and other countries, i.e., “the seismites are the beds with SSDS really induced by earthquakes” The majority of geologists attended the symposium agrees with this definition I also agree with this definition But, this definition is far from the definition of Seilacher (1969) 3.3 Whether the term “seismites” should be obsoleted or not? Shanmugam (2016) proposed that the term “seismites” should be obsoleted Van Loon et al (2016a) suggested obsoleting the term “seismites” as soon as possible In “Preface of the Chinese version of the seismite problem” (Feng, 2017), I indicated that the term “seismites” has been used for 47 years in the world Whether it should be obsoleted or not, should be discussed and determined by numerous geologists in China and other countries, and should be determined by geological practice In “Research of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismite in ChinadA brief review” (Feng et al., 2016), I said that the first word of the title of the paper by Van Loon et al (2016a) is “seismites” It seems that “obsoleting the term seismites as soon as possible” may not be that easy In the symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites”, most Please cite this article in press as: Feng, Z.-Z., A successful symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites”, Journal of Palaeogeography (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jop.2016.11.002 Z.-Z Feng geologists don't agree to obsolete the term “seismites” and stand for retaining it My viewpoint is that (1) The definition of “seismites” by Seilacher (1969) should be obsoleted, because it is not accordant with geological fact (2) However, another definition of “seismites” by many geologists today, i.e., “seismites are the beds with SSDS really induced by earthquakes”, should not be obsoleted and should be retained As mentioned above, SSDS are beds with multiorigin, therefore: The beds with SSDS s seismites The beds with SSDS > seismites The term “seismites” should be strictly restricted in the beds with SSDS which are really induced by earthquakes This viewpoint may be also an important common view of this symposium 3.4 About the term “震积岩” (Zhenjiyan) Prof Yi-Ming Gong translated the English term “seismites” into the Chinese term “震积岩” (Zhenjiyan), and juxtaposed it with “海啸岩” (tsunamites) and “风暴岩” (tempestites), and therefore introduced these English terms into Chinese literature (Gong, 1987, 1988) It is a contribution to the geology of China However, from the viewpoint of translation, the English term “seismites” should be translated into the Chinese term “地震岩” (Dizhenyan), but not “震积岩” (Zhenjiyan) The Chinese term “地震岩” (Dizhenyan) means that the beds with SSDS which are really induced by earthquakes, i.e., it totally coincides with the English term “seismites” But the Chinese term “震积岩” (Zhenjiyan) means that the beds with SSDS which are both induced by earthquakes and sedimentation Obviously, the definition of “震积岩” (Zhenjiyan) cannot coincide with the definition of “seismites”, because the “seismites” is only induced by earthquakes The earthquakes are post-sedimentation events and are unrelated to transportation and sedimentation of soft-sediment So, the “震积岩” (Zhenjiyan) is a mistranslated term and should not be used any more If some geologists are willing to use the term “震积 岩” (Zhenjiyan) continually, they have to define it anew and definitely indicate that the new definition of “震积岩” (Zhenjiyan) is not the Chinese translated term of “seismites” 3.5 About the clastic injections In “Preface of the Chinese version of the seismite problem” (Feng, 2017), I indicated that: The clastic injections, such as sand dikes, sand veins, sand pipes, sand blows, and mud volcanoes, are the product of upward escaped pore water in the consolidated soft-sediment The clastic injections are with multi-origin, and the earthquake is one of the origins Therefore, they cannot definitely be the “seismites” and may not be the exact criteria of “in-situ earthquakes” (Einsele et al., 1996) If some geologists consider the clastic injections as seismites or the criteria of “in-situ earthquakes”, the reliable evidences are necessary About this viewpoint, there is no oppositional idea 3.6 About evaluation of “The seismite problem” by Shanmugam Some geologists said that I have made over high evaluation of “The seismite problem” by Shanmugam, whereas, I have not completely pointed out the problems in his paper 3.6.1 About “over high evaluation” of Shanmugam's paper In “Preface of the Chinese version of the seismite problem” (Feng, 2017), I said that the most important contribution of Shanmugam's paper “The seismite problem” is a challenge to the term “seismites” introduced by Seilacher (1969) and it is a challenge with basis, insight and courage I think the evaluation is appropriate Firstly, the term “seismites” introduced by Seilacher (1969), i.e., “fault-graded beds interpreted as seismites”, is really problematic, because it does not coincide with geological fact Since 1969, many geologists have found a lot of sandwiched SSDS in the area where Seilacher (1969) studied, but he did not find these structures These sandwiched SSDS are unrelated to earthquakes Secondly, as mentioned above the “4 graded zones” introduced by Seilacher (1969) are not “graded beds”, and he did not provide any evidence of earthquakes for the “4 graded zones” Therefore, the challenge raised by Shanmugam (2016) is rational It has been 47 years since Seilacher (1969) introduced the term “seismites” Shanmugam is the first geologist who criticized, challenged and denied the term “seismites” systematically from its “root-cause” Please cite this article in press as: Feng, Z.-Z., A successful symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites”, Journal of Palaeogeography (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jop.2016.11.002 A successful symposium As mentioned above, the definition of “seismites” by many geologists today, i.e., “seismites are the beds with SSDS really induced by earthquakes”, is greatly different from the definition of Seilacher (1969) Therefore, the definition of “seismites” by Seilacher (1969) should be obsoleted a long time ago During the 47 years, nobody did it, whereas, Shanmugam (2016) did it It is really valuable That is why I said: The most important contribution of Shanmugam (2016) is that he made a challenge with basis, insight and courage to the term “seismites” introduced by Seilacher (1969) I think this evaluation is appropriate Here, I want to say that Shanmugam only challenged and denied the term “seismites” introduced by Seilacher (1969), but he did hold positive comments on Seilacher's great contributions to geology and palaeontology In Chinese geological field, it just lacks this spirit of challenge with basis, insight and courage (towards academic problems) and with courtesy (towards the authors) We should learn from this spirit 3.6.2 About the problems in Shanmugam's paper In “Preface of the Chinese version of the seismite problem” (Feng, 2017), it is true that I have not completely pointed out the problems in Shanmugam's paper (Shanmugam, 2016) The most important problem in Shanmugam's paper is that he thought SSDS not and cannot reveal anything about triggers In fact, this viewpoint is agnostic in philosophy Since I was to write the preface of the Chinese version of his paper, his contributions should be emphasized while the problems should be pointed out implicitly Therefore, in “Preface of the Chinese version of the seismite problem”, I said: “if we utilize the method of contradiction, the SSDS can reveal something about the triggers, i.e., can reveal something about the origin of SSDS” If SSDS not and cannot reveal anything about triggers, then we geologists who are studying SSDS may be incapable In fact, Shanmugam had illustrated clearly some examples, in which the origin of SSDS has been revealed, such as “Example and Example 2” in section 4.5 of “Preface of the Chinese version of the seismite problem” But Shanmugam failed to find the principal origin, i.e., the principal contradiction in these examples It seems that Shanmugam himself and a few other geologists are not good at utilizing the method of materialistic dialectics and finding principal contradictions in complex process with many contradictions In addition, there are other problems in Shanmugam's paper Such as his Figure 2, the core photographs of microfolds in anhydrite layers Anhydrite is a plastic rock The deformation structures of plastic rock are different from SSDS of sandstone, shale, etc Such as in his paper, he failed to unify the terms of “trigger” and “triggering mechanism” Such as in his paper, he did not clearly indicate whether the clastic injections, duplex-like structures are SSDS or not In my mind, the clastic injections and duplex-like structures are sedimentary structures, and they may not exactly be SSDS However, these problems mentioned above belong to academic viewpoints Every geologist possibly has different viewpoint, and therefore I cannot force Prof Shanmugam In summary, although there are some problems in Shanmugam's paper, but it is a paper with plentiful content, original and distinctive viewpoints, a paper with angular thinking, and a paper of challenge with basis, insight and courage This paper is really valuable for those Chinese geologists who are doing studies of SSDS and seismites This paper has made contributions to causing much contending at the symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites” (including discussions before and after the symposium) This paper has made contributions to changing the “almost one viewpoint” of researches of SSDS and seismites in China Conclusions Conclusions of the symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites” are as follows: 1) “SSDS” is a well descriptive term and it should be used continually The “Multi-origin of SSDS” is a general knowledge about the origin of SSDS Numerous geologists have agreed with the conception and it can be used continually 2) The definition of “seismites” by Seilacher (1969), i.e., “fault-graded beds interpreted as seismites”, should be obsoleted However, the definition of “seismites” by many geologists today, i.e., “the seismites are the beds with SSDS really induced by earthquakes”, should not be obsoleted and should be retained The term “seismites” should be strictly restricted in the beds with SSDS that are really induced by earthquakes 3) The term “震积岩” (Zhenjiyan) is a mistranslated term and should not be used any more If some geologists are willing to use the term “震积岩” Please cite this article in press as: Feng, Z.-Z., A successful symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites”, Journal of Palaeogeography (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jop.2016.11.002 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) Z.-Z Feng (Zhenjiyan) continually, they have to define it anew and definitely indicate that the new definition of “震积岩” (Zhenjiyan) is not the Chinese translated term of “seismites” The clastic injections are also with multi-origin, and the earthquake is one of origins of the clastic injections They cannot definitely be the “seismites” and may not be the exact criteria of “in-situ earthquakes” The most important product of the symposium is that the phenomenon of “almost one viewpoint” of the researches of SSDS and seismites in China has been changed A stone triggered thousand waves The symposium has activated the academic atmosphere of “a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend” in researches of SSDS and seismites of China Certainly, the knowledge of the symposium will be tested again by the geological practice in China and other countries in the future Congratulations on the success of the symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites”! A thousand thanks to the geologists in China and other countries who actively supported the symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites”! Acknowledgements I want to express my gratitude to Prof G Shanmugam, Prof Yuan-Sheng Du, Prof Yi-Ming Gong, and Prof De-Chen Su for their valuable reviewing comments; to Yuan Wang and Min Liu for their helpful correcting suggestions; and to Xiao-Ming Wu for her hard typewriting work References Deng, X.P., 1982 Work with one heart and one mind for construction In: Selected Works of Deng Xiaoping, vol People Press, Beijing, 1993, pp 9e11 (in Chinese) Einsele, G., Chough, S.K., Shiki, T., 1996 Depositional events and their records d an introduction Sedimentary Geology, 104, 1e9 Feng, Z.Z., 2017 Preface of the Chinese version of the seismite problem Journal of Palaeogeography, 6(1), 7e11 Feng, Z.Z., Bao, Z.D., Zheng, X.J., Wang, Y., 2016 Researches of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites in China d a brief review Journal of Palaeogeography, 5(4), 311e317 Gong, Y.M., 1987 Event deposits Geological Science and Technology Information, 6(3), 21e26 (in Chinese) Gong, Y.M., 1988 Tempestite, seismite and tsunamite: a discussion of several sedimentological terms Geological Review, 34(5), 481e482 (in Chinese) Mao, T.T., 1937 On practice In: Selected Works of Mao Tsetung, vol Foreign Languages Press, Fourth Printing, 1977, Peking, pp 295e309 Seilacher, A., 1969 Fault-graded beds interpreted as seismites Sedimentology, 13(1e2), 155e159 Shanmugam, G., 2016 The seismite problem Journal of Palaeogeography, 5(4), 318e362 ns, M., _ M., Nartiss, M., Krieva Van Loon, A.J., Pisarska-Jamrozy, Soms, J., 2016a Seismites resulting from high frequency, high magnitude earthquakes in Latvia caused by Late Glacial glacio-isostatic uplift Journal of Palaeogeography, 5(4), 363e380 Van Loon, A.J., Mazumder, R., De, S., 2016b The response of stromatolites to seimic shocks: Tomboliths from the Palaeoprototerozoic Chaibasa Formation, E India Journal of Palaeogeography, 5(4), 381e390 Zhang, B.H., Tian, H.S., Zhu, J.W., 2016 Records of the Pleistocene seismic events in Tancheng Maipo, Shandong Province Journal of Palaeogeography (Chinese Edition), 18(5), 799e808 (in Chinese with English abstract) Please cite this article in press as: Feng, Z.-Z., A successful symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites”, Journal of Palaeogeography (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jop.2016.11.002 ... The symposium of “Multi -origin of soft- sediment deformation structures and seismites? ?? was successfully held on September 24, 2016, at the 14th National Conference of Palaeogeography and Sedimentology... et al wrote a paper “Researches of soft- sediment deformation structures and seismites in China d A brief review” (Feng et al., 2016) as “to cast a brick to attract the jade”, emailed this paper... process of “practice, knowledge, again practice, and again knowledge” Knowledge of the symposium The symposium of “Multi -origin of soft- sediment deformation structures and seismites? ?? is very successful