New evolutionary chapter found in the Grand Canyon

[Old Rocks]

An evolutionary chapter just older than the Cambrian period found in the Grand Canyon. Fascinating little animals with unique ways of surviving.

MSN

 

[toobfreak]

An evolutionary chapter just older than the Cambrian period found in the Grand Canyon.

No, 508 million was still well into the Cambrian.

 

[ReinyDays]

No, 508 million was still well into the Cambrian.

There's far far older material in the Grand Canyon ... 2 billion years IIRC ...

 

[Mushroom]

An evolutionary chapter just older than the Cambrian period found in the Grand Canyon

Uh, did you even read your own reference?

A stunning fossil discovery in the Grand Canyon has opened a new window into one of the most fascinating chapters in Earth’s history. Buried in rocks that are over 505 million years old, scientists uncovered more than 1,500 tiny fossils that date back to the time just after the Cambrian explosion, a period when life on Earth was not just growing more complex, but getting more creative, too.

And considering the Cambrian started some 538 mya, that is very much inside the Cambrian.

And I have no idea what they even men by saying the "Bright Angel Formation", I am not aware of any such thing in the Grand Canyon. However, there is the "Bright Angel Shale", and it does compose one of the Cambrian Tonto Groups that can be observed in the Grand Canyon. It is actually a rather extensive layers of shale that can be found not only there but into California and Nevada.

And the diversity of fossils in that layer are absolutely nothing new. That has been a prime layers for trilobite fossil hunters for around a century.

And in looking through what "she" has published, this is typical of a lot of what I call "junk science". Low effort articles written in a sensationalist manner for "clicks". And after reading many (as well as the questionable "biography"), I honestly suspect this is an AI bot that somebody made.

Melissa holds a degree in Microbial Biotechnology and Plant Valorization from the Mouloud Mammeri University (UMMTO) in Tizi-ouzou, Algeria, with a strong background in biology and geology. With a focus on Earth systems and natural phenomena, she contributes to Daily Galaxy, where she covers topics like seismic activity, planetary science, and space exploration in a way that's easy to understand. She's also really into archaeology, adding a rich perspective on Earth's history and human origins to her scientific work.

 

[Cougarbear]

Catastrophic deposition: Geologists of all persuasions are returning to catastrophism, and nearly every stratum has recently been reinterpreted as the result of water-related processes operating at increased rates and intensities in the past. Evidence of underwater turbidity currents is found in the Tapeats Sandstone, the Redwall Limstone, and others.

Widespread strata: Each stratum covers large areas of the western U.S. Depositional processes of the past covered the entire region, not local areas. The Supai Formation has traditionally been interpreted as a delta deposit, but has laterally extensive thin members, unlike modern deltas.

Fossils: The fossils at every level are extremely complex, but the ones in the bottom layers, such as the trilobites, are even more complex than the ones nearer the top, such as corals. No evolutionary sequence here!

Lack of erosion on the plateau: The Colorado Plateau is thought to have been uplifted some 70 million years ago, but the stratum on top at the time of uplift is still on top, a flat, featureless plain, hardly touched by erosion.

Erosion of Grand Canyon: The Canyon was eroded but the present Colorado River was not the erosive agent. Erosion was rapid, not so long ago according to dating efforts, and the waters carried the debris far to the west, not like the modern Colorado River. Furthermore, the main erosional features are typically those of soft sediments, not hard rock.

Soft sediment deformation: According to the evolutionary view, many rocks were already hundreds of millions of years old at the time of uplift. However, the Tapeats Sandstone was clearly bent while it was still soft, unconsolidated sediment, not as hard rock. Evidently, it was not very old.

Radioisotope dating: Results from radioisotope dating efforts are not at all consistent with the old-earth study. In fact, volcanic basalts on the rim date as older than the deeply buried Cardenas Basalts.

 

[Old Rocks]

Catastrophic deposition: Geologists of all persuasions are returning to catastrophism, and nearly every stratum has recently been reinterpreted as the result of water-related processes operating at increased rates and intensities in the past. Evidence of underwater turbidity currents is found in the Tapeats Sandstone, the Redwall Limstone, and others.

Widespread strata: Each stratum covers large areas of the western U.S. Depositional processes of the past covered the entire region, not local areas. The Supai Formation has traditionally been interpreted as a delta deposit, but has laterally extensive thin members, unlike modern deltas.

Fossils: The fossils at every level are extremely complex, but the ones in the bottom layers, such as the trilobites, are even more complex than the ones nearer the top, such as corals. No evolutionary sequence here!

Lack of erosion on the plateau: The Colorado Plateau is thought to have been uplifted some 70 million years ago, but the stratum on top at the time of uplift is still on top, a flat, featureless plain, hardly touched by erosion.

Erosion of Grand Canyon: The Canyon was eroded but the present Colorado River was not the erosive agent. Erosion was rapid, not so long ago according to dating efforts, and the waters carried the debris far to the west, not like the modern Colorado River. Furthermore, the main erosional features are typically those of soft sediments, not hard rock.

Soft sediment deformation: According to the evolutionary view, many rocks were already hundreds of millions of years old at the time of uplift. However, the Tapeats Sandstone was clearly bent while it was still soft, unconsolidated sediment, not as hard rock. Evidently, it was not very old.

Radioisotope dating: Results from radioisotope dating efforts are not at all consistent with the old-earth study. In fact, volcanic basalts on the rim date as older than the deeply buried Cardenas Basalts.

And your PhD in geology is from the Trump University?

 

[Cougarbear]

And your PhD in geology is from the Trump University?

And, each statement is factual. Instead of bad attempts at being funny, offer information to support your theory of what happened with evidence. You can’t. So, you resort to insults. I bet you are a Democrat too.

 

[ReinyDays]

And, each statement is factual. Instead of bad attempts at being funny, offer information to support your theory of what happened with evidence. You can’t. So, you resort to insults. I bet you are a Democrat too.

No citations? ... then your statements are all unqualified opinion ... I can tell you right now that none of what you said applies to volcanic arc provinces ... these are strictly igneous provinces with igneous rocks ...

Here's the evidence from the Hawaiian Islands: "How old are the Hawaiian Islands?" -- BioLogos -- 2018 ...

Now let's see your citations ... "Geologic Principles - Faunal Succession" -- NPS -- 2024 ...

 

[Cougarbear]

No citations? ... then your statements are all unqualified opinion ... I can tell you right now that none of what you said applies to volcanic arc provinces ... these are strictly igneous provinces with igneous rocks ...

Here's the evidence from the Hawaiian Islands: "How old are the Hawaiian Islands?" -- BioLogos -- 2018 ...

Now let's see your citations ... "Geologic Principles - Faunal Succession" -- NPS -- 2024 ...

There's a lot of science and science used by secular PhD's as well. Those articles in the publication they come from have lots of references. You won't know this because of your normalcy bias to not read them.

 

[ReinyDays]

There's a lot of science and science used by secular PhD's as well. Those articles in the publication they come from have lots of references. You won't know this because of your normalcy bias to not read them.

And your normal refusal to provide them ... where did you copy/paste your post #5? ...

 

[Cougarbear]

And your normal refusal to provide them ... where did you copy/paste your post #5? ...

I've provided them in the past. You can do your own research on www.icr.org or a few other ones and check them out. The references are there as well.

 

[Mushroom]

Erosion of Grand Canyon: The Canyon was eroded but the present Colorado River was not the erosive agent.

The Colorado River was indeed the erosive agent. But the actual "cause" of the canyon being cut was not the river itself but the uplift of the region.

Here is something that most people can't really understand. Most of the time canyons are not formed because of the river itself that passes through it, but because of the uplifting of the crust. Hell's Canyon is the deepest canyon in the US, and it also is a canyon cut by uplift of the crust.

And where you have no crustal uplift, you almost never have a canyon. There are lots of rivers that have significantly larger waterflow than either the Snake or Colorado rivers, but there are no canyons there. The Nile, Mississippi, and Amazon are just three that come immediately to mind. And in those there was little to no crustal uplift, so the rivers never carved a canyon (or limited uplift in a few locations).

But where you combine uplift and a river, like the Columbia, Snake and Colorado rivers you get canyons. And it's the same story where I live now, the Rogue Valley. The entire area was once a flat basaltic plain about 240 meters higher than it is today about 40 mya. But more uplift afterwards caused the ancestor of the Rogue River to start carving into the rocks, forming the valley as we know it today, and leaving some impressive table rock mesas behind.

 

[Mushroom]

Fossils: The fossils at every level are extremely complex, but the ones in the bottom layers, such as the trilobites, are even more complex than the ones nearer the top, such as corals. No evolutionary sequence here!

Have any kind of proof to these claims? Because this sounds like more pseudoscience to me by a young earth creationist.

The deepest layers of the canyon is the Vishnu Formation. About 1.8 gya, there are no fossils in that layer.

Above that you have the Grand Canyon Supergroup. Around 750 mya. And there, about the only fossils are stromatolites of cyanobacteria. Once again, nothing complex there other than algae colonies.

And between those two, you have the "Great Uncomformity". About a billion years of geological history simply erased.

And after the Supergroup, another unconformity of about 3 million years before you get the Kaibab Formation. That is where most of the advanced fossils are from, and that is also the youngest layer in the canyon.

So please, present some kind of evidence of trilobites and other "advanced fossils" in the Vishnu Formation or the Grand Canyon Supergroup. Because I have never seen any evidence that they appear anywhere below the Tonto Group, which is a subsection of the Grand Canyon Supergroup.

 

[Cougarbear]

The Colorado River was indeed the erosive agent. But the actual "cause" of the canyon being cut was not the river itself but the uplift of the region.

Here is something that most people can't really understand. Most of the time canyons are not formed because of the river itself that passes through it, but because of the uplifting of the crust. Hell's Canyon is the deepest canyon in the US, and it also is a canyon cut by uplift of the crust.

And where you have no crustal uplift, you almost never have a canyon. There are lots of rivers that have significantly larger waterflow than either the Snake or Colorado rivers, but there are no canyons there. The Nile, Mississippi, and Amazon are just three that come immediately to mind. And in those there was little to no crustal uplift, so the rivers never carved a canyon (or limited uplift in a few locations).

But where you combine uplift and a river, like the Columbia, Snake and Colorado rivers you get canyons. And it's the same story where I live now, the Rogue Valley. The entire area was once a flat basaltic plain about 240 meters higher than it is today about 40 mya. But more uplift afterwards caused the ancestor of the Rogue River to start carving into the rocks, forming the valley as we know it today, and leaving some impressive table rock mesas behind.

 

[Mushroom]

View attachment 1181655

Yes, by a broken irrigation ditch that cut through sand and clay, not rock.

And it's 1,500 feet long, 120 feet deep, and 35 feet wide.

Not a thing like the grand canyon, and not through rock.

So what is your point here, exactly?

That is the reason why the Missoula Floods did not cut canyons, even though it passed through the same areas. Because those flowed over rock (primarily basalt), not sand and clay.

 

[Cougarbear]

Yes, by a broken irrigation ditch that cut through sand and clay, not rock.

And it's 1,500 feet long, 120 feet deep, and 35 feet wide.

Not a thing like the grand canyon, and not through rock.

So what is your point here, exactly?

That is the reason why the Missoula Floods did not cut canyons, even though it passed through the same areas. Because those flowed over rock (primarily basalt), not sand and clay.

Think of the land being all joined together before the flood. Then, massive upheavals like you said because of water from the fountains of the deep (You do know about all the water science has found in the earth. Massive). Then the one continent brakes apart. Water everywhere! Then, the waters resided as stated in the Bible. carving out the Grand Canyon with the help of the hand of God.

 

[Mushroom]

Think of the land being all joined together before the flood.

This is the science area, not the religion area. If you want to spew out coprolite about pseudo-science, that belongs in that area not in this area.

 

[Cougarbear]

This is the science area, not the religion area. If you want to spew out coprolite about pseudo-science, that belongs in that area not in this area.

Ah, only your science is allowed. Sorry, science is not settled. Especially your science. So, we will be happy to share our science information without your tyranny.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Catastrophic deposition: Geologists of all persuasions are returning to catastrophism, and nearly every stratum has recently been reinterpreted as the result of water-related processes operating at increased rates and intensities in the past. Evidence of underwater turbidity currents is found in the Tapeats Sandstone, the Redwall Limstone, and others.

Widespread strata: Each stratum covers large areas of the western U.S. Depositional processes of the past covered the entire region, not local areas. The Supai Formation has traditionally been interpreted as a delta deposit, but has laterally extensive thin members, unlike modern deltas.

Fossils: The fossils at every level are extremely complex, but the ones in the bottom layers, such as the trilobites, are even more complex than the ones nearer the top, such as corals. No evolutionary sequence here!

Lack of erosion on the plateau: The Colorado Plateau is thought to have been uplifted some 70 million years ago, but the stratum on top at the time of uplift is still on top, a flat, featureless plain, hardly touched by erosion.

Erosion of Grand Canyon: The Canyon was eroded but the present Colorado River was not the erosive agent. Erosion was rapid, not so long ago according to dating efforts, and the waters carried the debris far to the west, not like the modern Colorado River. Furthermore, the main erosional features are typically those of soft sediments, not hard rock.

Soft sediment deformation: According to the evolutionary view, many rocks were already hundreds of millions of years old at the time of uplift. However, the Tapeats Sandstone was clearly bent while it was still soft, unconsolidated sediment, not as hard rock. Evidently, it was not very old.

Radioisotope dating: Results from radioisotope dating efforts are not at all consistent with the old-earth study. In fact, volcanic basalts on the rim date as older than the deeply buried Cardenas Basalts.

This laughable, desperate nonsense does not belong in the science section. Keep your childish fantasies in the religion section.

 

[Cougarbear]

This laughable, desperate nonsense does not belong in the science section. Keep your childish fantasies in the religion section.

You are really not much of a scientist.