A century of science in America : $b with special reference to the American Journal of Science, 1818-1918
History
A century of science in America : $b with special reference to the American Journal of Science, 1818-1918
American journal of science; Science -- United States -- History
Even Hutton’s clear reasoning, firmly buttressed by concrete examples,
was insufficient to overcome the belief in ready-made or violently
formed valleys and original corrugations and irregularities of mountain
surface. The pages of the Journal show that the principles laid down by
Playfair were too far in advance of the times to secure general
acceptance. In the first volume of the Journal, the gorge of the French
Broad River is assigned by Kain to “some dreadful commotion in nature
which probably shook these mountains to their bases,”[7] and the gorge
of the lower Connecticut is considered by Hitchcock (1824)[8] as a
breach which drained a series of lakes “not many centuries before the
settlement of this country.” The prevailing American and English view
for the first quarter of the nineteenth century is expressed in the
reviews in this Journal, where the well-known conclusions of Conybeare
and Phillips that streams are incompetent to excavate valleys are quoted
with approval and admiration is expressed for Buckland’s famous
“Reliquiæ Diluvianæ,” a 300–page quarto volume devoted to proof of a
deluge. The professor at Yale, Silliman, and the professor at Oxford,
Buckland, saw that an acceptance of Hutton’s views involved a
repudiation of the Biblical flood, and much space is devoted to
combating these “erroneous” and “unscientific” views. For example,
Buckland says:[9]
“... The general belief is, that existing streams, avalanches and
lakes, bursting their barriers, are sufficient to account for all
their phenomena, and not a few geologists, especially those of the
Huttonian school, at whose head is Professor Playfair, have till
recently been of this opinion.... But it is now very clear to almost
every man, who impartially examines the facts in regard to existing
vallies, that the causes now in action, mentioned above, are
altogether inadequate to their production; nay, that such a
supposition would involve a physical impossibility. We do not believe
that one-thousandth part of our present vallies were excavated by the
power of existing streams.... In very many cases of large rivers, it
is found, that so far from having formed their own beds, they are
actually in a gradual manner filling them up.
Again; how happens it that the source of a river is frequently below
the head of a valley, if the river excavated that valley?
The most powerful argument, however, in our opinion, against the
supposition we are combating, is the phenomena of transverse and
longitudinal valleys; both of which could not possibly have been
formed by existing streams.”
Phillips writes in 1829:[10] “The excavation of valleys can be ascribed
to no other cause than a great flood of water which overtopped the
hills, whose summits those vallies descend.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account