VIIT 
arktiske have ikke kan foregaa saa langsomt som af Jensen 
formodet. 
Flere af de skalrester, som fandtes paa disse store 
dyb, giver for en del indtryk af at have været udsat for 
gnidning. De maa saaledes enten være stranslidte eller 
have faaet afslibningen ved friktion under isens bevægelser. 
For de fleste skalresters vedkommende, som toges 
paa det største dyb, 1333 fv., var kalken i mere eller 
mindre opløst tilstand, saaat adskillige skaller endog ikke 
kunde opbevares!). Dette, at skallerne saa hurtig synes at 
opløses paa disse store dyb, tyder paa, at de har været 
under en kemisk paavirkning, og at de saaledes maa have 
ligget paa havbundens overflade og ikke været dækket af 
et beskyttende lerlag. At de derfor i nogen længere tid 
— geologisk talt — skulde have ligget paa bunden, fore- 
kommer os lidet sandsynlig. 
Vi tør ikke indlade os i en diskussion, hvorvidt der 
har fundet en sænkning sted af de arktiske have. Men vi 
tror ikke, at grundtvandsskallernes forekomst paa de store 
dyb i Grønlandshavet kan benyttes som et bevis for hypo- 
thesen. Den strækning, hvor disse skaller er fundne, ligger 
inden smeltebeltet for store ismasser og naar disse fører 
med sig større og mindre mængder slam, som sikkerlig 
skriver sig fra kysterne, ligger det nær at antage, at ogsaa 
skallerne er ført ud paa dybet ved isen. 
For at faa en tilfredsstillende forklaring paa et fæno- 
men, som muligens kan faa en større geologisk betyd- 
ning, vilde det være af interesse, at geologerne nærmere 
undersøgte de løse stene, som findes paa den havstræk- 
ning, hvorom der er tale. Muligens vilde en saadan un- 
(lersøgelse give oplysning om, hvorfra de stammer. Under- 
søgelser af dette slags har tidligere løst interessante geolo- 
giske problemer. 
*) Cfr. John Murray & R. Irvine: On Coral Reefs and other Car- 
bonate of Lime Formations in Modern Seas; Proc. Roy. Soc. 
Edinburgh, vol. 17, p. 98. 
‘be used as an argument for this hypothesis. 
decidedly to prove that the formation of sediment in the 
arctic seas cannot take place as slowly as Jensen supposes. 
Several of the fragments of shell found at these 
great depths give a certain impression of having been sub- 
jected to friction, They must thus either have been 
ground opon the shore, or have acquired this worn appea- 
rance by friction during the moving of the ice. 
In most of the shell-remains taken at the greatest depth, 
1333 fathoms, the lime was in a more or less decomposed 
condition, so that several shells could not even be pre- 
served’), The fact of the shells being apparently so rapidly 
decomposed at these great depths, indicates that they have 
been under chemical influence, and must thus have lain 
upon the surface of the bottom, and cannot have been 
covered with a protecting layer of clay. It seems, there- 
fore, scarcely probable that they have lain there for any 
length of time, geologically speaking. 
We will not venture on any discussion as to whe- 
ther a subsidence of the arctic seas has taken place, but 
we do not believe that the occurrence of shell-remains from 
shallow-water in the great depths of the Greenland sea can 
The region in 
which these shells are found, lies within the melting-zone 
of great masses of ice, and as these take with them more 
or less mud that certainly originates on the coasts, it is 
not unreasonable to suppose that the shells are also-carried 
out into deep water by the ice. 
It would be interesting, if, in order to obtain a 
satisfactory explanation of a phenomenon which may 
possibly be of great geological importance, geologists would 
examine the loose stones that are found in this part of 
the ocean. An examination such as this might possibly 
give some enlightenment as to whence they come. Hxa- 
minations of this kind have solved interesting geological 
problems before now. 
1) Cfr. John Murray & R. Irvine: On Coral Reefs and other Car- 
bonate of Lime Formations in Modern Seas; Proc. Roy. Soc. 
Edinburgh, vol. 17, p. 98. 
