Response to Owen, H.G. (2014), Discussion on “Aldiss, D.T., Under-representation of faults on geological maps of the London region: reasons, consequences and solutions” [Proc. Geol. Assoc. 124 (2013) 929–945]

Aldiss, Don T.. 2014 Response to Owen, H.G. (2014), Discussion on “Aldiss, D.T., Under-representation of faults on geological maps of the London region: reasons, consequences and solutions” [Proc. Geol. Assoc. 124 (2013) 929–945]. Proceedings of the Geologists' Association, 125 (4). 499-500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pgeola.2014.07.004

Full text not available from this repository. (Request a copy)

Abstract/Summary

I thank Dr. Owen for his comments on my paper (Aldiss, 2013) and for his useful exploration of several aspects of the tectonic development of the London region. I am especially grateful for him drawing attention to his evidence for Quaternary faulting of the Gault in the south London area, and to several other pertinent and useful papers, notably Lake's (1975) discussion of the tectonics of the Weald and those by Owen, 1971 and Owen, 2012. However, I feel that his remarks mainly concern topics that are beyond the scope of my paper. My paper was not about the ‘distribution of current faults in the London region’, as much as being about the current understanding of the distribution of faults in the London region. I was not attempting to demonstrate that the London region has, in reality, been tectonically inactive nor that no faults have been recognized in the area – only that faulting is greatly under-represented on the local geological maps.

Item Type:	Publication - Article
Digital Object Identifier (DOI):	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pgeola.2014.07.004
ISSN:	00167878
Date made live:	22 Sep 2015 09:13 +0 (UTC)
URI:	https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/511824

Actions (login required)

View Item

Document Downloads

More statistics for this item...