If I were to defend Steve in this case, I would say he probably had a massive project in assimilating the database in his CatastroRef, and didn't have the time to include the refinements you and others have pointed out. Also, he may have intentionally reflected a bias to couterbalance the bias some of us see in the way origins is presented in schools. That's almost verbatim the criticism I've received regarding my personal allochthonous interpretation of Alabama coal. I can't speak yet to the Joggins trees, but in my own experience the overwhelming thrust of the data in Alabama supports allochthonous coal. That's faulty reasoning.
Every site has to be examined closely.
I believe all of these features could be incorporated into an allochthonous deposit. As far as the polystrate trees go, the analogy is faulty only if Joggins is autochthonous. Sure, these Sigillaria might not be in situ. So everything you've said above is incorrect. I use when arguing with Art Chadwick.