Explanation and Prediction in Geology

Abstract

Recent speculations by Simpson, Leopold and Langbein, and Krauskopf on the nature of geological science are shown to be erroneous. The interest of historical scientists in unique things and events does not mean that they cannot or should not derive laws for explanation and prediction; the usefulness of statistical generalizations does not mean that there is an element of uncertainty or chance in nature; nor does the principle of indeterminacy indicate that there is essential randomness at the base of natural processes. The correct nature of geology as a science is described.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 30 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.