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[.]

Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites

soft-sediment deformation structures and

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 1 November 2016; available online xxx

E-mail address: jpalaeo2012@163.com

Peer review under responsibility of China University of Petroleum (Beijing).

Available online atwww.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect

journal homepage: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-palaeogeography/

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/ ).

1 Introduction

The symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment

deformation structures and seismites” was

success-fully held on September 24, 2016, at the 14thNational

Conference of Palaeogeography and Sedimentology

held during September 23e25, 2016, at Henan

Poly-technic University, Jiaozuo, Henan Province, China

The symposium received 7 Chinese full text papers

in which one paper has been published in the Journal

of Palaeogeography (Chinese Edition), Vol 18, No 5,

2016; and 6 English full text papers in which 4 papers

have been published in the Journal of

Palae-ogeography, 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

view-point, in early 2016, Feng et al wrote a paper

“Re-searches 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

pre-sent 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

geolo-gists 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

ge-ologists invited by us

At the beginning of the symposium, I presented: (1)

100 copies of Vol 5, No 4 of the Journal of

Palae-ogeography, 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” byShanmugam (2016), and two articles “Seismites resulting from high-frequency, 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 For-mation, E India” byVan Loon et al (2016a, 2016b); (2)

100 copies of Vol 18, No 5 of the Journal of Palae-ogeography (Chinese Edition), which included the article “Records of the Pleistocene seismic events in Tancheng Maipo, Shandong Province” byZhang et al (2016); (3) 50 copies of the Chinese version of “Re-searches 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 prob-lem” by Feng, to participants as references of my keynote speech of the symposium Criticisms and corrections are heartily welcome

2 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 orig-inated 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, for-mation processes, and origin theories of SSDS, seismi-tes, 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

injections, i.e., the truth of them, will be clearer and

much clearer through the process of “practice,

knowledge, again practice, and again knowledge”

3 Knowledge of the symposium

The symposium of “Multi-origin of soft-sediment

deformation structures and seismites” is very

suc-cessful 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

sympo-sium, put forward many reviews, criticisms and

sug-gestions, to my keynote speech and the papers, such as

“Researches of soft-sediment deformation structures

and seismites in China d A brief review”, “The

seis-mite 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

ge-ologists 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 bySeilacher (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 bySeilacher (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 thatSeilacher (1969)studied, other ge-ologists have discovered many sandwiched folded beds, but they are unrelated to earthquakes

“The seismite problem” byShanmugam (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 “seis-mites” 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 dis-cussed and determined by numerous geologists in China and other countries, and should be determined

by geological practice

In “Research of soft-sediment deformation struc-tures and seismite in ChinadA brief review” (Feng

et al., 2016), I said that thefirst word of the title of the paper byVan 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

geologists don't agree to obsolete the term “seismites”

and stand for retaining it

My viewpoint is that (1) The definition of

“seismi-tes” bySeilacher (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

multi-origin, therefore:

The beds with SSDSs 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”

(Zhen-jiyan), 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 de

fi-nition 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 prob-lems 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 un-related to earthquakes

Secondly, as mentioned above the “4 graded zones” introduced bySeilacher (1969)are not“graded beds”, and he did not provide any evidence of earth-quakes for the“4 graded zones”

Therefore, the challenge raised by Shanmugam (2016)is rational

It has been 47 years since Seilacher (1969) intro-duced the term “seismites” Shanmugam is the first geologist who criticized, challenged and denied the term“seismites” systematically from its “root-cause”

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 bySeilacher (1969) I think this evaluation

is appropriate

Here, I want to say that Shanmugam only

chal-lenged 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 geologicalfield, 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 do 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

some-thing about the origin of SSDS”

If SSDS do 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 1 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

exam-ples It seems that Shanmugam himself and a few other

geologists are not good at utilizing the method of

materialistic dialectics and finding principal

contra-dictions in complex process with many contracontra-dictions

In addition, there are other problems in Shanmu-gam'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

4 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 geol-ogists 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”

(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”

4) The clastic injections are also with multi-origin,

and the earthquake is one of origins of the clastic

injections They cannot definitely be the

“seismi-tes” and may not be the exact criteria of “in-situ

earthquakes”

5) 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

atmo-sphere of “a hundred flowers blossom and a

hun-dred schools of thought contend” in researches of

SSDS and seismites of China

6) Certainly, the knowledge of the symposium will be

tested again by the geological practice in China and

other countries in the future

7) Congratulations on the success of the symposium of

“Multi-origin of soft-sediment deformation

struc-tures and seismites”!

8) A thousand thanks to the geologists in China and

other countries who actively supported the

sym-posium of“Multi-origin of soft-sediment

deforma-tion structures and seismites”!

Acknowledgements

I want to express my gratitude to Prof G

Shan-mugam, Prof Yuan-Sheng Du, Prof Yi-Ming Gong, and

Prof De-Chen Su for their valuable reviewing

com-ments; 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

3 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 seis-mite problem Journal of Palaeogeography, 6(1), 7e11

Feng, Z.Z., Bao, Z.D., Zheng, X.J., Wang, Y., 2016 Re-searches of soft-sediment deformation structures and seismites in China d a brief review Journal of Palaeo-geography, 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 dis-cussion of several sedimentological terms Geological Re-view, 34(5), 481e482 (in Chinese)

Mao, T.T., 1937 On practice In: Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung, vol 1 Foreign Languages Press, Fourth Printing,

1977, Peking, pp 295e309

Seilacher, A., 1969 Fault-graded beds interpreted as seismi-tes Sedimentology, 13(1e2), 155e159

Shanmugam, G., 2016 The seismite problem Journal of Palaeogeography, 5(4), 318e362

Van Loon, A.J., Pisarska-Jamro_zy, M., Nartiss, M., Krievans, M., 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, Shan-dong Province Journal of Palaeogeography (Chinese Edition), 18(5), 799e808 (in Chinese with English abstract)