Wave-Emplaced Coarse Debris and Megaclasts in Ireland and Scotland: Boulder Transport in a High-Energy Littoral Environment: A Discussion
Wave-Emplaced Coarse Debris and Megaclasts in Ireland and Scotland: Boulder Transport in a High-Energy Littoral Environment: A Discussion
复制标题
爱尔兰和苏格兰的波浪粗碎碎片和巨碎屑：高能滨海环境中的巨石运输：讨论
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2010
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
D. Williams
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. M. Hall;J. Hansom;D. Williams
谢弗斯等人。 （2009）描述了对不列颠群岛大西洋沿岸部分地区巨石堆积的勘察调查。他们的报告的很大一部分涉及在悬崖上高海拔地区发现的波浪输送巨石沉积物的特征。这些巨石沉积物也许在阿兰群岛、爱尔兰西部戈尔韦湾和苏格兰北部设得兰群岛埃沙内斯海岸达到了最终的发展，那里的波浪作用证据达到了海拔 50 米 (a.s.l.) 的高度。我们之前详细调查过这些地点以及许多其他类似地点，并得出结论，巨石沉积物是悬崖顶风暴沉积物（CTSD），是在这些高能量海岸的某些悬崖上发现的特征组合的一部分，这些特征与大风暴期间极端波浪的影响有关（Williams 和 Hall 2004；Hall 等人 2006、2008；Hansom 等人 2008；Hansom 和 Hall 2009）。然而，谢弗斯等人。 （2009 年，第 571 页）声称，在这些地点和其他地点，“没有证据……存在风暴波错位……在海拔 120 米处发现的巨石”。事实上，“对可能的风暴波高度、风暴波物理学或沉积物年龄的计算以及对异常风暴的描述都不足以解释这些位移”（第 568 页），并且“应考虑其他解释，例如海啸”（第 571 页）。在这里，我们通过简要重申来反驳这些说法——
Scheffers et al. (2009) describe a reconnaissance survey of boulder accumulations along parts of the Atlantic coasts of the British Isles. A substantial part of their report concerns the characteristics of wave-transported boulder deposits found high above sea level on cliffs. These boulder deposits reach perhaps their ultimate development along the coasts of the Aran Islands, Galway Bay, western Ireland, and Eshaness, Shetland, northern Scotland, where evidence of wave action reaches elevations of 50 m above sea level (a.s.l.). We have previously investigated in detail these and numerous other similar localities and concluded that the boulder deposits are cliff-top storm deposits (CTSDs), part of an assemblage of features found on certain cliffs on these very high-energy coasts that relate to the impacts of extreme waves during major storms (Williams and Hall 2004; Hall et al. 2006, 2008; Hansom et al. 2008; Hansom and Hall 2009). However, Scheffers et al. (2009, p. 571) claim that at these and other sites “no evidence ... exists for storm wave dislocation of ... boulders found at altitudes of 120 m a.s.l.” Indeed, “no calculations of possible storm wave heights, storm wave physics, or ages of the deposits and no descriptions of extraordinary storms are sufficient to explain these displacements” (p. 568), and “alternative explanations, such as tsunamis, should be considered” (p. 571). Here we rebut these claims by briefly restat-