At the end of last post I types "Figure" and meant to type "fire".

We did some better processing of the new seismic reflection (subbottom acoustic)data and the fault that crosses some of the profiles at a narrow angle was more interpretable. I mapped the fault, which is a splay or strand of the North Channel fault system, and it does cut obliquely across the profiles that I used to correlate to the core site. There are various geometric reason why you a fault is obscured on 2D seismic reflection profiles if the profiles do not cross it at a high angle. I had correlated a 1 million year old horizon through the fault without seeing it, instead of stepping the horizon up a couple (or several) hundred meters across it. Also, the core may be a little younger than the paleontologist thought. So, it looks like the disagreement between how old I thought the core would be and what it actually turned out to be is solved. However, I (and student) have not completed the interpretation and we need to process the data more to get a better image of the fault(s).
Chris