Is uniformitarianism necessary?; a reply

Clicks: 2
ID: 305784
1965
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #8,103 of 8,486 articles by views in american journal of science

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 8,486 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
In reply to C. R. Longwell9s discussion (ibid., p. 918-919) of Gould9s 1965 paper it is remarked that the study of present processes is necessary to understand nature9s past operations, but the term 9uniformitarianism9 should be dropped.
Reference Key
openalex_W2324130971 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors S. J. Gould
Journal american journal of science
Year 1965
DOI
10.2475/ajs.263.10.919
URL
https://doi.org/10.2475/ajs.263.10.919
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.