论文部分内容阅读
震旦系在地质年表(地层柱)中的位置,自葛利普将其属于古生界作为第一个系之后,李四光首先明确地表示了他的不同意见。李氏认为:“在缺乏古生代化石的现实情况下,将震旦系归属于古生界,显然是不妥当的。”从此,震旦系属于古生界还是属于元古界就成悬案,各家有不同的见解。 1959年全国地层会议曾对震旦系隶属问题展开讨论,终沒有得到一致的认识。近几年来,国內外有关这一问题的讨论仍在不断地进行。我们一向是主张属于元古界的;这里愿意联系中国南方情况,再次较全面地申述这一观点。
The position of Sinian in the geochronology (stratigraphic column), after Geilip had belonged to Paleozoic as the first line, Li Siguang first clearly expressed his disagreement. Li said: “In the absence of Paleozoic fossil reality, the Sinian belonging to the Paleozoic, is clearly inappropriate.” Since then, the Sinian belong to the Paleozoic or belong to the Proterozoic became a pending case, each The family has a different opinion. In 1959, the National Stratigraphy Conference discussed the issue of the subordination of the Sinian system and finally failed to get a consensus. In recent years, discussions on this issue both at home and abroad are still ongoing. We have always advocated belonging to the Proterozoic; here we are willing to contact South China to reiterate this point more fully.