Abstract
Misinterpretations of several of Branson's statements are pointed out. The conclusion that no large parts of the red beds are eolian in origin is reiterated, and additional evidences are given. The uncertainty of red-bed correlation is emphasized again, and Dr. Reeside's correlations are shown to be based on extremely insecure data. The relationships of the Popo Agie beds are stated to give no basis for making them a positive division-place in the Chugwater. Present information about red-bed vertebrate fossils is considered insufficient for correlations and age determinations.
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.
