14 



long-continued that, according to the independent estimates of different 

 geologists, if the postglacial period is represented by unity, then the period 

 which has elapsed since the beginning of glaciation must be represented by 

 two figures. ()1) But this conclusion of modern science is not recognized 

 by the Reverend Professor Wright save when he seeks to conceal its evi- 

 dence, and through a specious combination of quotation and suppression 

 to misrepresent the views of competent geologists. (N) Thus his descrip- 

 tion is superficial and warped, and his conclusions are worthless or unintelli- 

 gible. A generation ago the description and conclusions might have 

 passed for science; to-day they rank as CHARLATANRY. 



(Note M) What two figures, or is this a figure of speech? His Geo- 

 morphology should give more exact results. No one doubts changes in 

 climate during the glacial £>eriod. Many, and indeed most geologists, 

 doubt two entirely distinct glacial periods operating on the present surface 

 of the Northern States. The author gives a full representation of these 

 views, in fact fuller than he gives of his own (pages 322-326), including 

 even the name of Mr. McGee. Possibly Mr. McGee did not read the book 

 he abuses. From the fact that there early appeared lines of moraine far 

 back of the front of the drift, some, too early, inferred that there were two 

 entirely distinct glacial periods, being helped to that belief by a misunder- 

 standing of British glacial geology, explained in this volume. A part of 

 Professor Chamberlin's supposed moraine of the second glacial period will 

 be seen on his maps herein, but every time the ice stopped it left a terminal 

 moraine. Mr. Leverett has found eleven or twelve in Ohio. (See his 

 article and map, Am. Journal of Science for April, 1892.) It is absurd 

 to suppose each of these, marks a distinct glacial period, the ice from the 

 extreme north gracefully again advancing as in a dance, and carefully 

 stopping each time within a few miles of its former advance. 



(Note N) It is interesting to compare Wright's clear statement of both 

 sides, pages 106-120 and 322-326 with McGee's dogmatic statement in 

 Popular Seience Monthly for November, 1888, pp. 20-21. The Popular 

 Science Monthly for April, 1893, p. 774, rightfully charges the reviewer 

 with committing the very error he charges upon Professor Wright. 

 The distinguished author says, "We cannot find in the volume any assertion 

 that the ice age was a unit, though this is the view entertained by its 

 author. On the contrary fourteen pages are filled with the arguments on 

 both sides, enabling a reader to form his own opinion. It is fair to expect 

 the critic to shun the fault he condemns." Page 326, in a note the author 

 modestly says : * 'It does not yet seem to me that the duality of the period 

 is proved." 



