The turbidite-contourite-tidalite-baroclinite-hybridite problem: orthodoxy vs. empirical evidence behind the “Bouma Sequence”

Abstract The underpinning problems of deep-water facies still remain unresolved. (1) Tb, Tc, and Td divisions the turbidite model, with traction structures, are an integral part “Bouma Sequence” (Ta, Td, Te). However, deposits thermohaline contour currents, wind-driven bottom deep-marine tidal baroclinic currents (internal waves tides) also develop discrete rippled units, mimicking Tc. (2) application “cut-out” logic sequences, which was originally introduced for Sequence”, sharp basal contacts sandy containing well-developed to muddy contourites gradational absence structures is incongruent. (3) presence five internal hiatus in contourite model dispute. (4) Intersection along slope down sediment-gravity flows, triggering hybrid develops structures. (5) comparison genuine flows flow transformation gravity inconsistent etymology term “hybrid”. (6) A reexamination Annot Sandstone at Peira Cava type locality SE France fails validate either orthodoxy or their origin by turbidity currents. For example, “Ta” division composed amalgamated units inverse grading floating mudstone clasts, suggesting a mass-transport deposit (MTD). “Tb” “Tc” double mud layers sigmoidal cross bedding, respectively, suggest tidalite origin. (7) Although it reasonable introduce simplistic 1962, time limited knowledge on processes, obsolete now 2021 apply this rock record amid wealth new knowledge. (8) disconnect between 12 observed, but questionable, modern over 10,000 interpreted ancient turbidites defies doctrine uniformitarianism. This attributed routine genetic models, without pragmatic interpretation empirical data. (9) suggested solution these interpret sedimentary pragmatically basis field experimental evidence, any built-in bias using such as Sequence”. (10) Until reliable criteria developed distinguish each based uniformitarianism, general “BCRS” (i.e., bottom-current reworked sands) appropriate all four kinds