Reflections on the fate of some geomorphological ideas

Abstract

In geomorphology, as in other sciences, investigation is concerned with the collection and characterisation of data, and the generation and testing of working hypotheses. Considering the analysis of landforms and landscapes, the reasons some explanations have been accepted, others rejected, and yet others refuted but later approved, are examined. In particular, why hypotheses which were considered plausible but were shown to be flawed still recieved general acclaim, whereas others of obvious merit were ignored, are discussed. The roles of chance and the human factor are also broached.