DOCSLIB.ORG

International Chronostratigraphic Chart

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

INTERNATIONAL CHRONOSTRATIGRAPHIC CHART www.stratigraphy.org International Commission on Stratigraphy v 2013/01 numerical numerical numerical Eonothem numerical Series / Epoch Stage / Age Series / Epoch Stage / Age Series / Epoch Stage / Age GSSP GSSP GSSP GSSP EonothemErathem / Eon System / Era / Period age (Ma) EonothemErathem / Eon System/ Era / Period age (Ma) EonothemErathem / Eon System/ Era / Period age (Ma) / Eon Erathem / Era System / Period GSSA age (Ma) present ~ 145.0 358.9 ± 0.4 ~ 541.0 ±1.0 Holocene Ediacaran 0.0117 Tithonian Upper 152.1 ±0.9 Famennian ~ 635 0.126 Upper Kimmeridgian Neo- Cryogenian Middle 157.3 ±1.0 Upper proterozoic Pleistocene 0.781 372.2 ±1.6 850 Calabrian Oxfordian Tonian 1.806 163.5 ±1.0 Frasnian Callovian 1000 Quaternary Gelasian 166.1 ±1.2 2.588 Bathonian 382.7 ±1.6 Stenian Middle 168.3 ±1.3 Piacenzian 3.600 Bajocian 170.3 ±1.4 Givetian 1200 Pliocene Middle 387.7 ±0.8 Meso- Zanclean Aalenian proterozoic Ectasian 5.333 174.1 ±1.0 Eifelian 1400 Messinian Jurassic 393.3 ±1.2 7.246 Toarcian Devonian Calymmian Tortonian 182.7 ±0.7 Emsian 1600 11.62 Pliensbachian Statherian Serravallian Lower 407.6 ±2.6 13.82 190.8 ±1.0 Lower 1800 Miocene Pragian 410.8 ±2.8 Proterozoic Neogene Langhian Sinemurian Orosirian 15.97 199.3 ±0.3 Lochkovian Paleo- 2050 Burdigalian Hettangian 201.3 ±0.2 419.2 ±3.2 proterozoic 20.44 Mesozoic Rhaetian Pridoli Rhyacian Aquitanian 423.0 ±2.3 23.03 ~ 208.5 Ludfordian 2300 Cenozoic Chattian Ludlow 425.6 ±0.9 Siderian 28.1 Gorstian Upper Norian 427.4 ±0.5 2500 Oligocene Precambrian Rupelian Wenlock Homerian 430.5 ±0.7 Neo- 33.9 ~ 227 Sheinwoodian 433.4 ±0.8 archean Priabonian Carnian Silurian Telychian 2800 38.0 riassic ~ 237 Llandovery 438.5 ±1.1 Meso- Bartonian T 41.3 Ladinian Aeronian 440.8 ±1.2 archean Eocene Middle ~ 242 Rhuddanian Lutetian Anisian 443.4 ±1.5 3200 47.8 247.2 Hirnantian 445.2 ±1.4 Paleo- Olenekian Archean Ypresian Lower 251.2 archean Paleogene Induan 252.17 ±0.06 Upper Katian 56.0 Changhsingian 453.0 ±0.7 3600 Thanetian 254.14 ±0.07 59.2 Lopingian Sandbian Eo- Wuchiapingian Paleozoic Paleocene Selandian 259.8 ±0.4 458.4 ±0.9 Phanerozoic 61.6 Phanerozoic Phanerozoic archean Capitanian Darriwilian 4000 Danian 265.1 ±0.4 Middle 66.0 467.3 ±1.1 Guadalupian Wordian Dapingian Hadean Maastrichtian 268.8 ±0.5 470.0 ±1.4 Roadian Ordovician ~ 4600 72.1 ±0.2 272.3 ±0.5 Floian Campanian Kungurian Lower 477.7 ±1.4 Units of all ranks are in the process of being defined by Global Boundary Stratotype Section and Points (GSSP) for their lower 83.6 ±0.2 Permian 283.5 ±0.6 Tremadocian Santonian 485.4 ±1.9 boundaries, including those of the Archean and Proterozoic, long Upper 86.3 ±0.5 Artinskian defined by Global Standard Stratigraphic Ages (GSSA). Charts and Cisuralian 290.1 ±0.26 Stage 10 Coniacian ~ 489.5 detailed information on ratified GSSPs are available at the website 89.8 ±0.3 Sakmarian http://www.stratigraphy.org. The URL to this chart is found below. 295.0 ±0.18 Furongian Jiangshanian Turonian ~ 494 Asselian Numerical ages are subject to revision and do not define units in 93.9 298.9 ±0.15 Paibian ~ 497 Cenomanian Gzhelian Guzhangian the Phanerozoic and the Ediacaran; only GSSPs do. For boundaries 100.5 Upper 303.7 ±0.1 ~ 500.5 in the Phanerozoic without ratified GSSPs or without constrained Kasimovian numerical ages, an approximate numerical age (~) is provided. Paleozoic 307.0 ±0.1 aceous Series 3 Drumian t Albian ~ 504.5 Middle Moscovian Numerical ages for all systems except Permian,Triassic, Cretaceous 315.2 ±0.2 Stage 5 Mesozoic ~ 113.0 and Precambrian are taken from ‘A Geologic Time Scale 2012’ by Cre ~ 509 Lower Bashkirian Gradstein et al. (2012); those for the Permian, Triassic and Aptian Pennsylvanian Stage 4 323.2 ±0.4 Cretaceous were provided by the relevant ICS subcommissions. ~ 125.0 Series 2 ~ 514 Upper Serpukhovian Cambrian Stage 3 Barremian 330.9 ±0.2 Lower ~ 129.4 ~ 521 Hauterivian Coloring follows the Commission for the ~ 132.9 Middle Visean Stage 2 Geological Map of the World. http://www.ccgm.org Carboniferous ~ 529 Valanginian 346.7 ±0.4 Terreneuvian Chart drafted by K.M. Cohen, S. Finney, P.L. Gibbard ~ 139.8 Fortunian (c) International Commission on Stratigraphy, January 2013 Berriasian Mississippian Lower Tournaisian ~ 145.0 358.9 ±0.4 541.0 ±1.0 http://www.stratigraphy.org/ICSchart/ChronostratChart2013-01.pdf.
Recommended publications
  • Timeline of Natural History

    Timeline of Natural History

    Timeline of natural history This timeline of natural history summarizes significant geological and Life timeline Ice Ages biological events from the formation of the 0 — Primates Quater nary Flowers ←Earliest apes Earth to the arrival of modern humans. P Birds h Mammals – Plants Dinosaurs Times are listed in millions of years, or Karo o a n ← Andean Tetrapoda megaanni (Ma). -50 0 — e Arthropods Molluscs r ←Cambrian explosion o ← Cryoge nian Ediacara biota – z ←Earliest animals o ←Earliest plants i Multicellular -1000 — c Contents life ←Sexual reproduction Dating of the Geologic record – P r The earliest Solar System -1500 — o t Precambrian Supereon – e r Eukaryotes Hadean Eon o -2000 — z o Archean Eon i Huron ian – c Eoarchean Era ←Oxygen crisis Paleoarchean Era -2500 — ←Atmospheric oxygen Mesoarchean Era – Photosynthesis Neoarchean Era Pong ola Proterozoic Eon -3000 — A r Paleoproterozoic Era c – h Siderian Period e a Rhyacian Period -3500 — n ←Earliest oxygen Orosirian Period Single-celled – life Statherian Period -4000 — ←Earliest life Mesoproterozoic Era H Calymmian Period a water – d e Ectasian Period a ←Earliest water Stenian Period -4500 — n ←Earth (−4540) (million years ago) Clickable Neoproterozoic Era ( Tonian Period Cryogenian Period Ediacaran Period Phanerozoic Eon Paleozoic Era Cambrian Period Ordovician Period Silurian Period Devonian Period Carboniferous Period Permian Period Mesozoic Era Triassic Period Jurassic Period Cretaceous Period Cenozoic Era Paleogene Period Neogene Period Quaternary Period Etymology of period names References See also External links Dating of the Geologic record The Geologic record is the strata (layers) of rock in the planet's crust and the science of geology is much concerned with the age and origin of all rocks to determine the history and formation of Earth and to understand the forces that have acted upon it.
  • Palaeogene Marine Stratigraphy in China

    Palaeogene Marine Stratigraphy in China

    LETHAIA REVIEW Palaeogene marine stratigraphy in China XIAOQIAO WAN, TIAN JIANG, YIYI ZHANG, DANGPENG XI AND GUOBIAO LI Wan, X., Jiang, T., Zhang, Y., Xi, D. & Li G. 2014: Palaeogene marine stratigraphy in China. Lethaia, Vol. 47, pp. 297–308. Palaeogene deposits are widespread in China and are potential sequences for locating stage boundaries. Most strata are non-marine origin, but marine sediments are well exposed in Tibet, the Tarim Basin of Xinjiang, and the continental margin of East China Sea. Among them, the Tibetan Tethys can be recognized as a dominant marine area, including the Indian-margin strata of the northern Tethys Himalaya and Asian- margin strata of the Gangdese forearc basin. Continuous sequences are preserved in the Gamba–Tingri Basin of the north margin of the Indian Plate, where the Palaeogene sequence is divided into the Jidula, Zongpu, Zhepure and Zongpubei formations. Here, the marine sequence ranges from Danian to middle Priabonian (66–35 ma), and the stage boundaries are identified mostly by larger foraminiferal assemblages. The Paleocene/Eocene boundary is found between the Zongpu and Zhepure forma- tions. The uppermost marine beds are from the top of the Zongpubei Formation (~35 ma), marking the end of Indian and Asian collision. In addition, the marine beds crop out along both sides of the Yarlong Zangbo Suture, where they show a deeper marine facies, yielding rich radiolarian fossils of Paleocene and Eocene. The Tarim Basin of Xinjiang is another important area of marine deposition. Here, marine Palae- ogene strata are well exposed in the Southwest Tarim Depression and Kuqa Depres- sion.
  • Do Gssps Render Dual Time-Rock/Time Classification and Nomenclature Redundant?

    Do Gssps Render Dual Time-Rock/Time Classification and Nomenclature Redundant?

    Do GSSPs render dual time-rock/time classification and nomenclature redundant? Ismael Ferrusquía-Villafranca1 Robert M. Easton2 and Donald E. Owen3 1Instituto de Geología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Ciudad Universitaria, Coyoacán, México, DF, MEX, 45100, e-mail: [email protected] 2Ontario Geological Survey, Precambrian Geoscience Section, 933 Ramsey Lake Road, B7064 Sudbury, Ontario P3E 6B5, e-mail: [email protected] 3Department of Geology, Lamar University, Beaumont, Texas 77710, e-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT: The Geological Society of London Proposal for “…ending the distinction between the dual stratigraphic terminology of time-rock units (of chronostratigraphy) and geologic time units (of geochronology). The long held, but widely misunderstood distinc- tion between these two essentially parallel time scales has been rendered unnecessary by the adoption of the global stratotype sections and points (GSSP-golden spike) principle in defining intervals of geologic time within rock strata.” Our review of stratigraphic princi- ples, concepts, models and paradigms through history clearly shows that the GSL Proposal is flawed and if adopted will be of disservice to the stratigraphic community. We recommend the continued use of the dual stratigraphic terminology of chronostratigraphy and geochronology for the following reasons: (1) time-rock (chronostratigraphic) and geologic time (geochronologic) units are conceptually different; (2) the subtended time-rock’s unit space between its “golden spiked-marked”
  • MARS DURING the PRE-NOACHIAN. J. C. Andrews-Hanna1 and W. B. Bottke2, 1Lunar and Planetary La- Boratory, University of Arizona

    MARS DURING the PRE-NOACHIAN. J. C. Andrews-Hanna1 and W. B. Bottke2, 1Lunar and Planetary La- Boratory, University of Arizona

    Fourth Conference on Early Mars 2017 (LPI Contrib. No. 2014) 3078.pdf MARS DURING THE PRE-NOACHIAN. J. C. Andrews-Hanna1 and W. B. Bottke2, 1Lunar and Planetary La- boratory, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, [email protected], 2Southwest Research Institute and NASA’s SSERVI-ISET team, 1050 Walnut St., Suite 300, Boulder, CO 80302. Introduction: The surface geology of Mars appar- ing the pre-Noachian was ~10% of that during the ently dates back to the beginning of the Early Noachi- LHB. Consideration of the sawtooth-shaped exponen- an, at ~4.1 Ga, leaving ~400 Myr of Mars’ earliest tially declining impact fluxes both in the aftermath of evolution effectively unconstrained [1]. However, an planet formation and during the Late Heavy Bom- enduring record of the earlier pre-Noachian conditions bardment [5] suggests that the impact flux during persists in geophysical and mineralogical data. We use much of the pre-Noachian was even lower than indi- geophysical evidence, primarily in the form of the cated above. This bombardment history is consistent preservation of the crustal dichotomy boundary, to- with a late heavy bombardment (LHB) of the inner gether with mineralogical evidence in order to infer the Solar System [6] during which HUIA formed, which prevailing surface conditions during the pre-Noachian. followed the planet formation era impacts during The emerging picture is a pre-Noachian Mars that was which the dichotomy formed. less dynamic than Noachian Mars in terms of impacts, Pre-Noachian Tectonism and Volcanism: The geodynamics, and hydrology. crust within each of the southern highlands and north- Pre-Noachian Impacts: We define the pre- ern lowlands is remarkably uniform in thickness, aside Noachian as the time period bounded by two impacts – from regions in which it has been thickened by volcan- the dichotomy-forming impact and the Hellas-forming ism (e.g., Tharsis, Elysium) or thinned by impacts impact.
  • Climatic Shifts Drove Major Contractions in Avian Latitudinal Distributions Throughout the Cenozoic

    Climatic Shifts Drove Major Contractions in Avian Latitudinal Distributions Throughout the Cenozoic

    Climatic shifts drove major contractions in avian latitudinal distributions throughout the Cenozoic Erin E. Saupea,1,2, Alexander Farnsworthb, Daniel J. Luntb, Navjit Sagooc, Karen V. Phamd, and Daniel J. Fielde,1,2 aDepartment of Earth Sciences, University of Oxford, OX1 3AN Oxford, United Kingdom; bSchool of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Clifton, BS8 1SS Bristol, United Kingdom; cDepartment of Meteorology, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden; dDivision of Geological and Planetary Sciences, Caltech, Pasadena, CA 91125; and eDepartment of Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge, CB2 3EQ Cambridge, United Kingdom Edited by Nils Chr. Stenseth, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway, and approved May 7, 2019 (received for review March 8, 2019) Many higher level avian clades are restricted to Earth’s lower lati- order avian historical biogeography invariably recover strong evi- tudes, leading to historical biogeographic reconstructions favoring a dence for an origin of most modern diversity on southern land- Gondwanan origin of crown birds and numerous deep subclades. masses (2, 6, 11). However, several such “tropical-restricted” clades (TRCs) are repre- The crown bird fossil record has unique potential to reveal sented by stem-lineage fossils well outside the ranges of their clos- where different groups of birds were formerly distributed in deep est living relatives, often on northern continents. To assess the time. Fossil evidence, for example, has long indicated that total- drivers of these geographic disjunctions, we combined ecological group representatives of clades restricted to relatively narrow niche modeling, paleoclimate models, and the early Cenozoic fossil geographic regions today were formerly found in different parts of record to examine the influence of climatic change on avian geo- – graphic distributions over the last ∼56 million years.
  • Paleontology, Stratigraphy, Paleoenvironment and Paleogeography of the Seventy Tethyan Maastrichtian-Paleogene Foraminiferal Species of Anan, a Review

    Paleontology, Stratigraphy, Paleoenvironment and Paleogeography of the Seventy Tethyan Maastrichtian-Paleogene Foraminiferal Species of Anan, a Review

    Journal of Microbiology & Experimentation Review Article Open Access Paleontology, stratigraphy, paleoenvironment and paleogeography of the seventy Tethyan Maastrichtian-Paleogene foraminiferal species of Anan, a review Abstract Volume 9 Issue 3 - 2021 During the last four decades ago, seventy foraminiferal species have been erected by Haidar Salim Anan the present author, which start at 1984 by one recent agglutinated foraminiferal species Emirates Professor of Stratigraphy and Micropaleontology, Al Clavulina pseudoparisensis from Qusseir-Marsa Alam stretch, Red Sea coast of Egypt. Azhar University-Gaza, Palestine After that year tell now, one planktic foraminiferal species Plummerita haggagae was erected from Egypt (Misr), two new benthic foraminiferal genera Leroyia (with its 3 species) Correspondence: Haidar Salim Anan, Emirates Professor of and Lenticuzonaria (2 species), and another 18 agglutinated species, 3 porcelaneous, 26 Stratigraphy and Micropaleontology, Al Azhar University-Gaza, Lagenid and 18 Rotaliid species. All these species were recorded from Maastrichtian P. O. Box 1126, Palestine, Email and/or Paleogene benthic foraminiferal species. Thirty nine species of them were erected originally from Egypt (about 58 %), 17 species from the United Arab Emirates, UAE (about Received: May 06, 2021 | Published: June 25, 2021 25 %), 8 specie from Pakistan (about 11 %), 2 species from Jordan, and 1 species from each of Tunisia, France, Spain and USA. More than one species have wide paleogeographic distribution around the Northern and Southern Tethys, i.e. Bathysiphon saidi (Egypt, UAE, Hungary), Clavulina pseudoparisensis (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Arabian Gulf), Miliammina kenawyi, Pseudoclavulina hamdani, P. hewaidyi, Saracenaria leroyi and Hemirobulina bassiounii (Egypt, UAE), Tritaxia kaminskii (Spain, UAE), Orthokarstenia nakkadyi (Egypt, Tunisia, France, Spain), Nonionella haquei (Egypt, Pakistan).
  • Late Cretaceous–Eocene Geological Evolution of the Pontides Based on New Stratigraphic and Palaeontologic Data Between the Black Sea Coast and Bursa (NW Turkey)

    Late Cretaceous–Eocene Geological Evolution of the Pontides Based on New Stratigraphic and Palaeontologic Data Between the Black Sea Coast and Bursa (NW Turkey)

    Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences (Turkish J. Earth Sci.), Vol.Z. ÖZCAN 21, 2012, ET pp. AL. 933–960. Copyright ©TÜBİTAK doi:10.3906/yer-1102-8 First published online 25 April 2011 Late Cretaceous–Eocene Geological Evolution of the Pontides Based on New Stratigraphic and Palaeontologic Data Between the Black Sea Coast and Bursa (NW Turkey) ZAHİDE ÖZCAN1, ARAL I. OKAY1,2, ERCAN ÖZCAN2, AYNUR HAKYEMEZ3 & SEVİNÇ ÖZKAN-ALTINER4 1 İstanbul Technical University (İTÜ), Eurasia Institute of Earth Sciences, Maslak, TR−34469 İstanbul, Turkey (E-mail: [email protected]) 2 İstanbul Technical University (İTÜ), Faculty of Mines, Department of Geology, Maslak, TR−34469 İstanbul, Turkey 3 General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration (MTA Genel Müdürlüğü), Geological Research Department, TR−06520 Ankara, Turkey 4 Middle East Technical University (METU), Department of Geological Engineering, Ünversiteler Mahallesi, Dumlupınar Bulvarı No. 1, TR−06800 Ankara, Turkey Received 17 February 2011; revised typescript receipt 04 April 2011; accepted 25 April 2011 Abstract: Th e Late Cretaceous–Eocene geological evolution of northwest Turkey between the Black Sea and Bursa was studied through detailed biostratigraphic characterization of eleven stratigraphic sections. Th e Upper Cretaceous sequence in the region starts with a major marine transgression and lies unconformably on a basement of Palaeozoic and Triassic rocks in the north (İstanbul-type basement) and on metamorphic rocks and Jurassic sedimentary rocks in the south (Sakarya-type basement). Four megasequences have been diff erentiated in the Late Cretaceous–Eocene interval. Th e fi rst one, of Turonian to Late Campanian age, is represented by volcanic and volcanoclastic rocks in the north along the Black Sea coast, and by siliciclastic turbidites and intercalated calcarenites in the south, corresponding to magmatic arc basin and fore-arc basin, respectively.
  • Appendix 3.Pdf

    Appendix 3.Pdf

    A Geoconservation perspective on the trace fossil record associated with the end – Ordovician mass extinction and glaciation in the Welsh Basin Item Type Thesis or dissertation Authors Nicholls, Keith H. Citation Nicholls, K. (2019). A Geoconservation perspective on the trace fossil record associated with the end – Ordovician mass extinction and glaciation in the Welsh Basin. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Chester, United Kingdom. Publisher University of Chester Rights Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Download date 26/09/2021 02:37:15 Item License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10034/622234 International Chronostratigraphic Chart v2013/01 Erathem / Era System / Period Quaternary Neogene C e n o z o i c Paleogene Cretaceous M e s o z o i c Jurassic M e s o z o i c Jurassic Triassic Permian Carboniferous P a l Devonian e o z o i c P a l Devonian e o z o i c Silurian Ordovician s a n u a F y r Cambrian a n o i t u l o v E s ' i k s w o Ichnogeneric Diversity k p e 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 S 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 n 23 r e 25 d 27 o 29 M 31 33 35 37 39 T 41 43 i 45 47 m 49 e 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 Number of Ichnogenera (Treatise Part W) Ichnogeneric Diversity 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 n 23 r e 25 d 27 o 29 M 31 33 35 37 39 T 41 43 i 45 47 m 49 e 51 53 55 57 59 61 c i o 63 z 65 o e 67 a l 69 a 71 P 73 75 77 79 81 83 n 85 a i r 87 b 89 m 91 a 93 C Number of Ichnogenera (Treatise Part W)
  • A Community Effort Towards an Improved Geological Time Scale

    A Community Effort Towards an Improved Geological Time Scale

    A community effort towards an improved geological time scale 1 This manuscript is a preprint of a paper that was submitted for publication in Journal 2 of the Geological Society. Please note that the manuscript is now formally accepted 3 for publication in JGS and has the doi number: 4 5 https://doi.org/10.1144/jgs2020-222 6 7 The final version of this manuscript will be available via the ‘Peer reviewed Publication 8 DOI’ link on the right-hand side of this webpage. Please feel free to contact any of the 9 authors. We welcome feedback on this community effort to produce a framework for 10 future rock record-based subdivision of the pre-Cryogenian geological timescale. 11 1 A community effort towards an improved geological time scale 12 Towards a new geological time scale: A template for improved rock-based subdivision of 13 pre-Cryogenian time 14 15 Graham A. Shields1*, Robin A. Strachan2, Susannah M. Porter3, Galen P. Halverson4, Francis A. 16 Macdonald3, Kenneth A. Plumb5, Carlos J. de Alvarenga6, Dhiraj M. Banerjee7, Andrey Bekker8, 17 Wouter Bleeker9, Alexander Brasier10, Partha P. Chakraborty7, Alan S. Collins11, Kent Condie12, 18 Kaushik Das13, Evans, D.A.D.14, Richard Ernst15, Anthony E. Fallick16, Hartwig Frimmel17, Reinhardt 19 Fuck6, Paul F. Hoffman18, Balz S. Kamber19, Anton Kuznetsov20, Ross Mitchell21, Daniel G. Poiré22, 20 Simon W. Poulton23, Robert Riding24, Mukund Sharma25, Craig Storey2, Eva Stueeken26, Rosalie 21 Tostevin27, Elizabeth Turner28, Shuhai Xiao29, Shuanhong Zhang30, Ying Zhou1, Maoyan Zhu31 22 23 1Department
  • Treasury's Emergency Rental Assistance

    Treasury's Emergency Rental Assistance

    FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: TREASURY’SHEADING EMERGENCY1 HERE RENTAL ASSISTANCEHEADING (ERA)1 HERE PROGRAM AUGUST 2021 ongress established an Emergency Rental Assistance (ERA) program administered by the U.S. Department of the Treasury to distribute critically needed emergency rent and utility assistance to Cmillions of households at risk of losing their homes. Congress provided more than $46 billion for emergency rental assistance through the Consolidated Appropriations Act enacted in December 2020 and the American Rescue Plan Act enacted in March 2021. Based on NLIHC’s ongoing tracking and analysis of state and local ERA programs, including nearly 500 programs funded through Treasury’s ERA program, NLIHC has continued to identify needed policy changes to ensure ERA is distributed efficiently, effectively, and equitably. The ability of states and localities to distribute ERA was hindered early on by harmful guidance released by the Trump administration on its last day in office. Immediately after President Biden was sworn into office, the administration rescinded the harmful FAQ and released improved guidance to ensure ERA reaches households with the greatest needs, as recommended by NLIHC. The Biden administration issued revised ERA guidance in February, March, May, June, and August that directly addressed many of NLIHC’s concerns about troubling roadblocks in ERA programs. Treasury’s latest guidance provides further clarity and recommendations to encourage state and local governments to expedite assistance. Most notably, the FAQ provides even more explicit permission for ERA grantees to rely on self-attestations without further documentation. WHO IS ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE? Households are eligible for ERA funds if one or more individuals: 1.
  • Geologic History of the Earth 1 the Precambrian

    Geologic History of the Earth 1 the Precambrian

    Geologic History of the Earth 1 algae = very simple plants that Geologists are scientists who study the structure grow in or near the water of rocks and the history of the Earth. By looking at first = in the beginning at and examining layers of rocks and the fossils basic = main, important they contain they are able to tell us what the beginning = start Earth looked like at a certain time in history and billion = a thousand million what kind of plants and animals lived at that breathe = to take air into your lungs and push it out again time. carbon dioxide = gas that is produced when you breathe Scientists think that the Earth was probably formed at the same time as the rest out of our solar system, about 4.6 billion years ago. The solar system may have be- certain = special gun as a cloud of dust, from which the sun and the planets evolved. Small par- complex = something that has ticles crashed into each other to create bigger objects, which then turned into many different parts smaller or larger planets. Our Earth is made up of three basic layers. The cen- consist of = to be made up of tre has a core made of iron and nickel. Around it is a thick layer of rock called contain = have in them the mantle and around that is a thin layer of rock called the crust. core = the hard centre of an object Over 4 billion years ago the Earth was totally different from the planet we live create = make on today.
  • Critical Analysis of Article "21 Reasons to Believe the Earth Is Young" by Jeff Miller

    Critical Analysis of Article "21 Reasons to Believe the Earth Is Young" by Jeff Miller

    1 Critical analysis of article "21 Reasons to Believe the Earth is Young" by Jeff Miller Lorence G. Collins [email protected] Ken Woglemuth [email protected] January 7, 2019 Introduction The article by Dr. Jeff Miller can be accessed at the following link: http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=5641 and is an article published by Apologetic Press, v. 39, n.1, 2018. The problems start with the Article In Brief in the boxed paragraph, and with the very first sentence. The Bible does not give an age of the Earth of 6,000 to 10,000 years, or even imply − this is added to Scripture by Dr. Miller and other young-Earth creationists. R. C. Sproul was one of evangelicalism's outstanding theologians, and he stated point blank at the Legionier Conference panel discussion that he does not know how old the Earth is, and the Bible does not inform us. When there has been some apparent conflict, either the theologians or the scientists are wrong, because God is the Author of the Bible and His handiwork is in general revelation. In the days of Copernicus and Galileo, the theologians were wrong. Today we do not know of anyone who believes that the Earth is the center of the universe. 2 The last sentence of this "Article In Brief" is boldly false. There is almost no credible evidence from paleontology, geology, astrophysics, or geophysics that refutes deep time. Dr. Miller states: "The age of the Earth, according to naturalists and old- Earth advocates, is 4.5 billion years.