SUBSTANCE OF SOVIET CONFLICT ON SEDIMENTARY PETROGRAPHY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80-00809A000600370518-6
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 27, 2011
• Sequence Number: 518
• Publication Date: January 29, 1951
• Content Type: REPORT

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/27: CIA-RDP80-00809A000600370518-6
^1
CLASSIFICATION CONIDENTI: L 'CONFIDENTIAL
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY REPORT
INFORMATION FROM
FOREIGN DOCUMENTS OR RADIO BROADCASTS CD NO.
UBJECT Scientific - Minerals, ideology
OW
UBLISHED Bimonthly periodical
HERE
ATE
UBLISHED Jul 1950
LANGUAGE Russian
THIN DOCUM[NT CONTAIN! INFORMATION ATRCTINO TM[ NATIONAL DOFI1II
OF TAO UNITRD ^TATIN TIITMIN TN[ M[ANINO OF RNFIONA09 ACT 00
Y. N. C., NI AND 01. AN *111011. ITS T0ANIMINNIOM ON TMI N0O1LATION
OF ITf CONTONTN IN ANT MANNER TO AN UMAUTNO NII[D F[RNON IS PRO-
018IT9D MT LAW. NIFNODUCTION OF THIN FORM IN FROMIMITOD.
DATE OF
INFORMATION 1950
THIS IS UNEVALUATED INFORMATION
Izvestiya Akademii Nauk SSSR, Seriya Geologicheskaya, No 4, pp 65-147
SUBSTANCE OF SOVIET CONFLICT ON SEDIMENTARY PETROGRAPHY
The two conflicting positions in present?dav Soviet sedimentary petrog-
raphy' are developed at length in two papers: "The Problem of Principles in
the Science of Sedimentary Rocks," by L. V. Pustovalov, and "The Problem of
the General Theory of the Sedimentary Process," by N. M. Strakhov, presented
in Izvestiya Akademii Nauk SSSR, Seriya Ueologicheskaya, No 4,1950. These
two long articles, totaling 30 pages, represent a maze of charges and recrim.
inations plus dialectical declamations and therefore do not superpose uni-
formly to permit a point-by-point comparison of the positions developed. How-
ever, the salient features seem to be the following:
Firstly, the principle of periodicity in sediment formation, espoused by
Pustovalov, is based on trp idea of sequential development of all geological
factors of the earth, including inorganic nature, and thus also sedimentary
deposits. The sedimentary process, according to Pustovalov, is not a series
of chance events, but a regularly developing and norirepetitive process involv-
ing. new conditions of sediment formation. In this view, chemical sediments
are a natural development of detrital sediments. In this particular part of
the general argument, Strakhov states that "development of chemical sediments
as a whole within each rhythm is in nowise a continuation in time of the devel-
opment of detrital sediments as is sometimes thought."
The assertion of many geologists, including the Germans Bubnow and Wein-
s'chebk and the American Pettijohn, that differences in the composition of sedi-
mentary formations from early Pre-Caisbrian up to the -resent are inconsequen-
tial, is anathema to Pustovalov. This principle, he states, is antidialec-
tichl. As a matter of fact, Pustovalov devotes three pages to identification
of capitalistic foreign science with denial of development of inorganic phe-
nomena and consideration of sedimentary rocks as irregular "chance" formations.
He then'attempts'to identify Strakhov with the above principles, thus indirectly
linking him with capitalistic foreign science. Strakhov is not the only of-
fender, according to Pustovalov; others guilty of asserting that "any rocks
are characteristic of each geological period',' are Professor A. N. Mazarovich,
V. T. Lichitskiy, and A. N. Zavaritskiy.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/27: CIA-RDP80-00809A000600370518-6
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/27: CIA-RDP80-00809A000600370518-6
I
CONFFDEN IAL
CONFIDENTIIL
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/27: CIA-RDP80-00809A000600370518-6
Strakhov is careful not to criticize the principles underlying Pusto-
valov's theory of periodicity, but maintains that the law of periodicity was
established without any real inspection of the actual stratigrajhic distri-
bution of rocks even on one real section of the earth's crust and thus rep-
resents a purely specious bit of inductive reasoning by its author. Strakhov
therefore endeavored to pick out many specific errors in Pustovalov's diagram
of periodicity in mineral sediment formation (first given in his book Petrog-
raphy, of Sedimentary Rocks, Gostoptekhizdat, 1940) which diagram was supposed
to be for he European USSR. For example, the diagram showed an abundance of
detrital rocks for the Upper Silurian, whereas actually there are almost none
on the Russian platform, the S2 here being almost solidly carbonate. Strakhov
frankly admits that many of his studies were undertaken specifically to check
various of Pustovalov's assumptions. He counters with his own system of pe-
riodicity of sediment formation from the standpoint of comparative lithology.
Pustovalov states that each time that someone has attempted to use comparative
lithology for the study of a certain object, it has led to erroneous results.
Furthermore, Pustovalov continues, he cannot cite one convincing example where
the geological conditions of the past have been reconstructed by methods of
comparative lithology.
The second major criticism hinges around Pustovalov'n theory of chemical
differentiation, according to which sediments in transport should be settled
out in a*definite order, namely: (1) oxides or iron and other heavy metals;
(2) colloidal silica; (3) alumina; (4) ferrous iron silicates; (5) calcium
carbc?-ates; (6) magnesium carbcnetes; and (7) sulfates and halides. Pusto-
valov assumed that from a region of intensive destruction of magmatic rocks
the most diverse substances simultaneously entered into migration in the same
direction in the form of molecular and colloidal solutions and moved from
river waters into coastal salty waters and then entered into marine reser-
voirs.
Strakhov finds much to criticize in this theory. First, it was drawn up
for an arbitrary river and an arbitrary marine reservoir and is illustrated
by only one practical example, the Upper Permian deposits of the Tatar ASSR.
it is worthwhile here to cite one of Strakhov's footnotes which rather
neatly sums up his whole argument, i.e., that Pustovalov's concepts are
merely deductive generalizations which have not been checked by field studies:
"Before presenting his system jf chemical differentiatio], L. V. Pustovalov
warns'that this system was drawn up with consideration for geological obser-
vations on the successive change of various types of sedimentary rocks of the
USSR in both the vertical and horizontal directions a?i on the preferential
.'adaptation of various synchronous sediments to definite facies and also with
consideration for our knowledge of'the geochemical behavior of various com-
pounds and elements in a sediment-formation zorir.?" We note, however, that
.al these actual observations are not"given in the book before the system of
eheiical differentiation is introduced as is customary in lithological works,
butt are given in passing whine developing the system itself and then only in
such a general and intangible form that it is frequently difficult to deter-
mine what in these observations is actually taken from the facts and what
is taken from the preconceived notions of Pustovalov. Analysis of two illus-
trations.given by ustovalov shows that his idea of factual material is highly
original."
Second, according to Strakhov, even for thr single example given, ob-
jective analysis of the lithology of Upper..Permian rocks of the Tatar ASSR
shows that these rocks do not conform to Pustovalov's system of chemical
differentiation.
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/27: CIA-RDP80-00809A000600370518-6
C 1 FiDENTIA1
Thirdly, Strakhov asserts, Pustovalov failed to take into account the
real form in which chemical components are transported in rivers. Pustovalov
assumed, states Strakhov, that they are transported in the form of molecular
or colloidal solutions, whereas actually, he continues, as proven by hydrolog-
ical studies of the Syr Dar'ya, Amu Darya, Yolga,'Dnepr, and many other rivers,
the majority of elements are transported in suspensions.
Pustovalov does admit errors in his text Petrography of Sedimentar;, - Rocks,
namely schematic nature of presentation, inaccurate formulation of physico-
chemical development of sedimentary rocks, and insufficient attention to cli-
mate and organisms as sediment-formation factors. He maintains, however, that
the very fact that each issue of Izvestiya Akademii Nauk SSSR, Seriya Geologi-
cheskaya contains more and more works developing, su; .m.ementing, and criticiz-
ing the problems set forth in his book, such as periodicity of sediment forma-
tion sedimentary differentiation, paragenesis of sedimentary rocks, regulari.
ties in their composition, arrangement, etc., proves that his generalizations
were timely and effective.
In summarizing, therefore, it appears that Pustovalov would attempt to
first deduce broad generalizations and have them used in practice to confirm,
revise, or reject them, while Strakhov would attempt to accumulate a vast amount
of factual data from which generalizations could be deduced. The two papers
reflect this, for in Pustovalov's we find discussions of broad general prob-
lems with almost no mention of specific periods, formations, or minerals, while
Strakhov's is full of references to specif ic periods; etc,; obtained from his own
and others' works.
It may be noteworthy that (L) Pustovalov dites'& our. foreign sources and criti-
cizes three; Strakhov cites seven foreign.references and uses all to support
his arguments; (2) Pustovalov uses no fewer than 15 quotes from Engels, Marx,
and Stalin (he even quotes Lysenko) while Strakhov used only one quote from
I.P. Pavlov; and (3) Pustovalov frequently refers to state care for science
and the possibility of solving problems only by using the dialectical method
while such references are very uncommon in Strakhov's.work. It will be inter-
esting to note whether the conference on the lithography of
sedimentary rocks which will be held early in 1951 provides fur-
ther developments in this controversy.
CONFIDENTIAL
1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/27: CIA-RDP80-00809A000600370518-6