Abstract
As a general rule we may feel sure that the boulders scattered over the surface of a district which consists chiefly of boulder clay, have been derived from the underlying deposit. There are, however, some cases in which the inference is unsafe. For instance, the Thames now marks the southern limit of the glacial drift—a curious circumstance, and one of which a wholly satisfactory explanation has not been given. Many think that this sharp definition of the southern limit of the glacial drift is so improbable that they would fain attribute some deposits in North Kent to the glacial period, or at any rate would expect to find a few sporadic boulders stranded on the slopes of the North Downs; and there far-transported fragments do not unfrequently occur.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
HUGHES, T. On Some Sources of Error in the Study of Drift. Nature 50, 5–6 (1894). https://doi.org/10.1038/050005b0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/050005b0
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.