literature, Price deduced that the "facts of the rocks and fossils, stripped of mere theories, splendidly refute this evolutionary theory of the invariable order of the fossils, which is the very backbone of the evolutionary doctrine." He had read of strata containing fossils of a young era lying conformably on strata containing fossils of very old eras. The geologist who described these lithically identical layers said that "one would naturally suppose that a single formation was being dealt with, were it not for fossil evidence." To Price, that, and the lack of any evidence of erosion between the strata, implied that little time could have occurred between the two layers of rock. Price also discovered in the literature examples of similar conformable strata, but in the reverse order, the old rocks on top and the young strata below according to interpretation of the fossils. Although appearing "to succeed one another conformably" the Canadian Geologic Survey contended for over-thrusting principally based on the fossil content. Price's interpretation of the evidence was that "the geological record does not prove succession of ages, but rather shows a "taxonomic" series representing different but contemporaneous zones of antediluvian life." So, in Price's 1913 book, The Fundamentals of Geology, an expanded version of Illogical Geology, he presented the "Law of Conformable Stratigraphic Sequences" which states "any kind of fossiliferous rock may occur conformably on any other kind of fossiliferous rock, old or young." To Price this law was "by all odds the most important law ever formulated with reference to the order in which the strata occur." Yale geologist Schuchert's review of The New Geology for the magazine Science stated that Price was "harboring a geological nightmare". However, the creationists welcomed the new book. Harry Rimmer claimed that it was "a masterpiece of REAL science [that] explodes in a convincing manner some of the ancient fallacies of science 'falsely so called'". Within a couple of years, Price appeared prominently in several conservative religious periodicals. A Science editor described him as "the principal scientific authority of the Fundamentalists". Price, concerned about scientific methodology, had read Whithead and other philosophers and understood that facts were always subject to interpretation. While Price was confident that "inductive geology" inferred a recent Creation, he acknowledged that debate between creationism and naturalism lay outside of science, "across the boundary-line in the domain of philosophy and theology." He claimed that naturalists regarded facts