Abstract
Investigators seeking to solve the mystery of rock varnish formation have yet to embrace hypothesis testing. Thus, this paper presents nine tests that assess the validity of the eight hypotheses proposed over the last four decades to explain varnish formation. An almost singular focus on manganese (Mn)-enrichment by many in varnish research may have led to six of the eight hypotheses failing to explain iron (Fe)-enrichment, as well as why clay minerals dominate the composition of rock varnish. Many varnish researchers displayed a sampling bias by collecting samples only from hot and dry deserts; thus, it should be of no surprise that four hypotheses failed a test of explaining varnishes in different climates; five hypotheses failed to explain varnishes in subsurface locations; and seven hypotheses failed to explain differences in varnish growth rates in hot deserts versus wetter locations. In the end, seven of eight proposed hypotheses to explain varnish formation failed more than five tests, any one of which would falsify the hypothesis. Only one hypothesis “passed” all nine tests.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
