RE: Boundries of the Late Pleistocene

[Saint Abyssal <saint_abyssal@yahoo.com>]

Thanks!

~ Abyssal

--- On Tue, 3/27/12, Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. <tholtz@umd.edu> wrote:

> From: Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. <tholtz@umd.edu>
> Subject: RE: Boundries of the Late Pleistocene
> To: saint_abyssal@yahoo.com, "'Dinosaur Mailing List'" <dinosaur@usc.edu>
> Date: Tuesday, March 27, 2012, 8:31 AM
> While the boundary date for the
> Holocene (and thus the end of the Pleistocene) have indeed
> changed over time based on changing
> definition and geochronology, I don't think it has ever been
> as young as 5ka!
> 
> BTW, current boundary is 11,700 calendar yrs b2k (the only
> unit that uses 2000 CE rather than 1950 as "the present"):
> https://engineering.purdue.edu/Stratigraphy/references/HoloceneGSSP_JQuatSci090.pdf
> 
> Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
> Email: tholtz@umd.edu   
> Phone: 301-405-4084
> Office: Centreville 1216   
>         
> Senior Lecturer, Vertebrate Paleontology
> Dept. of Geology, University of Maryland
> http://www.geol.umd.edu/~tholtz/
> Fax: 301-314-9661        
> 
> Faculty Director, Science & Global Change Program,
> College Park Scholars
> http://www.geol.umd.edu/sgc
> Fax: 301-314-9843
> 
> Mailing Address:    Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
>            
> Department of Geology
>            
> Building 237, Room 1117
>            
> University of Maryland
>            
> College Park, MD 20742 USA 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu
> [mailto:owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu]
> 
> > On Behalf Of Saint Abyssal
> > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 10:14 PM
> > To: Dinosaur Mailing List
> > Subject: Boundries of the Late Pleistocene
> > 
> > Have the range of dates regarded as "Late Pleistocene"
> ever 
> > changed? Specifically, my conundrum is that I'm
> consulting a 
> > ~50 year old source 
> > (http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/48593/2/ID455
> > .pdf) on some local fossils (the Fenton Lake bony fish)
> and 
> > in one place in the paper it refers to remains as "Late
> 
> > Pleistocene" (page 6) but in another area a chart
> implies 
> > that the fossils are at most a hair over five thousand
> years 
> > old (page 32). That date falls into the mid Holocene,
> so I'm 
> > wondering if paleontologists have ever regarded such
> recent 
> > dates as Late Pleistocene.
> > 
> > ~ Abyssal
> 
>