Abstract
The writer's interpretations of Great Lakes history, which have been seriously questioned by J Harlen Bretz in this Journal (1959, 1964), are explained in detail in a review of the field facts, and a new alternative hypothesis of the lakes history is presented. The principal points of disagreement involve the acceptance or rejection of recent studies in the Lake Ontario basin and St. Lawrence valley, which require a revision of the correlation of events in the Huron and Michigan basins. A distinction is made between field facts and Bretz's interpretations of field facts.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
