首页> 外文期刊>The Mountain Geologist >Testing Laramide Hypotheses for the Front Range Arch Using Minor Faults: Reply
【24h】

Testing Laramide Hypotheses for the Front Range Arch Using Minor Faults: Reply

机译:使用小故障测试前拱的Laramide假设:答复

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

I apologize to the readers of The Mountain Geologist and to my coauthor, Scott Larson, for my misrepresentation of the contributions of Boos and Boos (1957) and Matthews and Work (1978). I agree that Boos and Boos (1957), while reinterpreting some faults in the northeastern Front Range to steeper angles than some previous authors, did discuss thrust faults to the south and west. Matthews and "Work (1978), in contrast, did not consider the implications of structures outside the northeastern Front Range, My offending sentence should have read "Near vertical dip slip was proposed on the higher angle, range-bounding faults of the northeastern Front Range Arch (Fig. 3a; Boos and Boos, 1957; Matthews and Work, 1978), a hypothesis that might be compatible with the low-angle, older-over-younger faults on the western margin of the arch if they were gravity slides." These errors are due to my attempt to concisely summarize previous papers in a necessarily limited space.
机译:我向《山区地质学家》的读者和我的合著者斯科特·拉尔森(Scott Larson)道歉,因为我对布斯和布斯(Boos and Boos,1957年)和马修斯与工作(Matthews and Work,1978年)的贡献作了错误的陈述。我同意Boos和Boos(1957)在重新解释东北锋山脉的某些断层以比以前的某些作者更陡的角度的同时,确实讨论了南部和西部的逆冲断层。相比之下,马修斯(Matthews)和“工作(1978)”没有考虑东北锋范围以外结构的影响,我的冒犯句子应为“东北锋的较大角度,范围界断层附近提出了垂直垂向滑移Range Arch(图3a; Boos和Boos,1957年; Matthews和Work,1978年),这一假设可能与弓形西部边缘的低角度,年轻且年轻的断层相容,如果它们是重力滑动的话这些错误是由于我试图在必要的有限空间内简要总结以前的论文而引起的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号