The beginning of this blog was deconstruction of many old ideas in South East Asian geology. I posted over a dozen entries before publicising the blog in order to give it some basic technical content. These entries were, by definition, negative, and frankly a little off-putting. Promoting a science by showing where it has gone wrong. Very poor marketing!
However, from this point on I want to use the data published in these early papers and posts to build a new view of SE Asian geology. We simply got stuck in a rut. Now it is time to take advantage of the regulatory bodies more open attitude to data (thank you MIGAS and Petronas!) and take a new direction.
- New, genetic units. That is: new definitions of the things we talk about. Natural sequences that fit the tectono-stratigraphic history. A new appreciation of the stages of basin development and modification; – an end to the rift-sag terminology, replaced by a system naturally linked to the tectonic development.
- So simple, yet so fundamental. If we divided animals into classes such as things with wings and things that swim in the sea, then biology would go nowhere. By applying passive margin eustatic sequence stratigraphy (and to tout it as a replacement for formations and all other stratigraphy), and “syn-rift” or back-arc basin jargon to SE Asian geology, we are going down the same pseudo-scientific path. Not only do we need clear, descriptive and evidence-based language for our nouns, but discovering what these are reveals the processes that make and link them.
- A new plate tectonic history and perhaps a new mechanism, one that explains the 20 million year history of Sundaland undergoing extension and subsidence (L. Eocene to E. Miocene). This then changed to a collisional phase as Philippine and Australian micro-plate approached. No existing proposals exist for how or why Sundaland sank. It is just overlooked.
- New aspects only now being realised. Obviously a series of new palaeogeographies arise for each of the new “mega-sequences” or episodes, but there are other fascinating subjects worthy of study. For example the speed at which changes happened has been under-estimated in the past. To terminate reefs by drowning (without associated siliciclastic pollution) is pretty extreme, considering how many major reefs survived post ice age sea-level rise. The odd correlation of several periods of carbonate facies extinctions to times of rapid tectonic change is covered in a couple of new papers (one linked here, but about to be superceded), but I don’t see an answer yet other than unlikely coincidence. Also the palaeontology of the larger foraminifera is a super topic for evolutionary biology, for a life form that is basically a protozoan faking at being a metazoan. Some outstanding sedimentological topics such as the moderately deep marine sand bodies in upper Cycle V of Sarawak, or the correlation of Early Miocene deep water fans all the way from Batu Blah to Batumandi (north Sarawak to NW Sabah), still require study.
- Exploration for hydrocarbons. Once climate alarm hysteria has died down (see also this) we can get on with the job of using energy to create and sustain wealth. The new palaeogeographies of course will impact petroleum systems elements and plays. There will be a major turn-over in exploration ideas in the region. We will not gain new insight into the sunda-fold plays of central Sumatra or other well-explored plays, but the new ideas will be the requirement to find high value new plays in overlooked areas and depths.
The next generation who tackle these basic questions and build a new geology will be well equipped to lead SE Asian nations and their universities into the 21st Century. They will not be bamboozled by old establishment authorities, which are sadly inert in the west. Geology needs to be part of this paradigm shift.
Be First to Comment