Abstract
Van Andel and Hospers's1 conclusion that an inclination error is present in sedimentary rocks throughout the geological column is considered highly premature for the following reasons, (a) Palaeomagnetic data from varves which have a depositional remanent magnetization (d.r.m.) for which it is suspected2 there may be an inclination error are grouped with those from sedimentary rock types (for example, red beds) which have crystallization remanent magnetism (c.r.m.) for which an inclination error is most unlikely. (b) Certain pairs of data used by van Andel and Hospers are invalid for the purpose of their analysis, as shown later in this communication, (c) Their statistical method is not satisfactory in that they have to exclude data for which the inclination difference between lavas and sediments |I*|–|I| = 0. The method is crude in that no account is taken of the magnitude of the inclination error for each data pair or of its accuracy.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
