Skip to main content
Log in

On Some Sources of Error in the Study of Drift

  • Letter
  • Published:

From Nature

View current issue Submit your manuscript

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, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints 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

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/050005b0

  • Springer Nature Limited

Navigation