DOCSLIB.ORG

The Supai Group Subdivision and Nomenclature

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Supai Group Subdivision and Nomenclature The Supai Group S ubdivi sion and Nomencl a tu re cKE By EDWIN D. M E C O N T R I B U T I O N S T O S T R A T I G R A P H ! G E O L O G I C A L S U R V E ! B U L L E T I N 1 3 9 5 The S upai Forma tion of the Grand Canyon region is rais ed in rank to S upa i Group and div ided into four formations tha t range in age from E arly P ennsy lvanian to Early P ermian D O OFF C W H O UNITE STATES G V ERNMENT P RINTING I E, AS INGT N UNITED STATES DEP ARTM ENT OF THE INTERIOR B M S ecre ar ROGERS C. ORTON , t y GEOL OGICAL SURV E! M l E . cK e e i V . v y , D rector Lib rary of Congress Cataloging in Publication Dat a Mc Kee E d in Din iddie 1 9 0 6 , w w , — Th e S upai Group Sub divis ion and nome nclat ure . ( Contrib utions t o s tratigraphy) ( Ge ol ogical S urve y Bulle tin 1 3 9 5 -1 ) : Bibliography p . - . D . : I S up t of ocs no . J — — G 1 . Ge o t ti hic Pe mi n. 2 . Ge t ti hic Penns ni n. 3 . e logy , S ra grap r a ology , S ra grap ylva a ology , — — — Stratigrap hic Nome nclat ure A riz ona Grand Canyo n region. - 1 . : in 1 3 9 5 1 Titl e II S erie s . III . S eries Unite d S tate s Geological S urve y Bull e t — — . N 4 7 5 6 1 9 02 2 Q E 7 5 B9 o . 1 3 9 5 1 [ Q E 6 7 ] For sa e b th e u e r n te n d e n t of ocum e n ts ov e r n m e n t r n t n ffice l y S p i D , U . S . G P i i g O ashin ton 040 W g , D . C . 2 2 - - S to ck Number 024- 001 02656 2 CONTENTS In troduction : field terminology and new nomencla ture Wa tahomigi Forma tion M anakacha Formation We scogame Forma tion E splanade Sands tone Correlation wi th previous subdivi sions Type section of Supai Group in Havasu Canyon References ci ted ILLU STRATION FIGU RE 1 . n x ma of su n n n t n n I de p Hava Ca yo , or her Arizo a CONV ERSION OF MEAS U REME NTS TO METRIC EQU IV ALENTS 1 mile CONTRIBU TIONS TO STRATIGRAP H! THE S U P AI GROU P — S U BDIV ISION AND NOM ENCL ATU RE M cKEE By EDWIN D. ABSTRACT The Supai Formation of the Grand Canyon region is raised in rank to Supai Group and nt s su s s n and t n n t s divided i o four formations . Wide pread rface of ero io hi co glomera e bed r separate these formations which range in age from Early Pennsylvanian to Ea ly Permian . st to un s t t n the Watahomi i Manakacha and Wesco ame From olde yo ge , hey are amed g , , g t ns and th s n n n t s t ns t s t ns are in Forma io e E pla ade Sa ds to e . The ype ec io of he e forma io su n n in he n Hava Ca yo t vici ity of Supai village . INTRODU CTION : FIELD TERMINOLOG! AND NEW NOMENCLATU RE Probably the firs t geologis t to carefully consider subdivis ion of the u o on n o o o n e un s was . S pai F rmati i t l gical , readily rec g izabl it F E M f o f s o o u . In n o o atthe the U S . Ge logical S rvey maki g a t p graphic map B n u n in 1 90 - 3 no s of s the right A gel q adra gle 2 , he ticed that the red bed thi o on o o n H s f rmati , t gether with the verlyi g ermit Shale , characteri tically o n o o n n s n s s on ou er ded i t three pr mi e t cliff , i ter per ed am g f r well o s n on f o o un s was devel ped slopes . The di crimi ati o these t p graphic it ’ called to my atten tion by Matthes in the 1 930 s in connection with my “ s u s of n ss on o us u t die the Supai Formatio . A field cla ificati that pr ved ef l in o rec rding data at that time and in all subsequent work resulted . u s on of u on s s of o o ss on us S bdivi i the S pai the ba i t p graphic expre i , ed u n s n - n s on o n o o n un s : d ri g the pre e t field i ve tigati , rec g ized the f ll wi g it un o n u s n un s n Upper cliff it, l cally i cl de a recedi g ledge it (E pla ade cliff) Upper s lope unit (divided by conglomerate into two parts) Middle cliff unit Middle s lope unit Lower cliff unit Lower s lope unit s un s can ou ou n n on and The e it be traced thr gh t the Gra d Ca y , they o one end to the o ou in n differ remarkably little fr m ther , alth gh , ge eral , J l J2 CONTRIBUTIONS To STRATIGRAP H! un o ss and o n n o s and the cliff its are m re ma ive pr mi e t t ward the we t, the In n s n slope units are less conspicuous in that direction . ma y we ter sections the middle s lope unit is so weakly developed that the lower and i n s s to o . u o n t middle cliff u it eem merge t gether F rtherm re, the ex reme n n n on s on s in of o s o wes ter Gra d Ca y , lime t e bed the middle the l wer l pe unit are so massive and cliff forming that this unit locally is divisible into three subunits . Although subdivisions of the Supai as originally delineated were based n on o o and n on s of o s n e tirely t p graphy ( i directly the type r ck repre e ted), n s un ] on s and su s to o n certai key bed , fa a z e , marker rface came be rec g ized, nd n o to o M a they le t much supp rt correlations from place t place . os t important of the key beds are widespread conglomerates that occur at three horizons (in addition to the ba sal conglomerate on the Redwall on f Limes t e surface) and are recognized throughou t mos t o the region . s on o s o s to s o u 1 ou two- s the The e c gl merate , l we t highe t , cc r ( ) ab t third s n u o s o un n s of un di ta ce p the l wer l pe it , (2) ear the ba e the middle cliff it, and 3 ou of u ( ) ab t the middle the pper s lope unit . The key bed conglomerates are dis tinctive li thologically The upper two on o s sso su s of os on n c gl merate are a ciated with marked rface er i , havi g as u as 45 in nn s us s to s n i on relief m ch feet cha el ; th , they eem repre e t reg al un on o In so s of n s o s . on n u and c f rmitie me part the regi , mari e fa a ab ve below these conglomerates show that hiatuses of appreciable magnitude s n u w o in are repre e ted by them . The ppermos t conglomerate as rec gnized 25 of 3 1 s ons su one was o n in 1 9 of ecti that I mea red, the middle rec g ized 27 s ons and o one in 1 4 of 5 n ecti , the l wer 2 sectio s . Partly on the ba sis of widespread eros ion surfaces and diagnos tic con glomerates as sociated with them and partly on the basis of topographic ss on s n u of n n on expre i that facilitate mappi g , the S pai s trata the Gra d Ca y are here divided into four formations which together are class ed as the u o 1 is s u . us u o on of on 1 9 0 S pai Gr p Th , the S pai F rmati Dart ( ) here rai ed in n to u ou and n ou o ons as o o s ra k S pai Gr p divided i to f r f rmati , f ll w o s to oun s : Wa tahomi i Manakacha and Wesco ame ( lde t y ge t) g , , g o ons and n n F rmati E spla ade Sa ds tone .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ron Blakey, Publications (Does Not Include Abstracts)
    Ron Blakey, Publications (does not include abstracts) The publications listed below were mainly produced during my tenure as a member of the Geology Department at Northern Arizona University. Those after 2009 represent ongoing research as Professor Emeritus. (PDF) – A PDF is available for this paper. Send me an email and I'll attach to return email Blakey, R.C., 1973, Stratigraphy and origin of the Moenkopi Formation of southeastern Utah: Mountain Geologist, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 1 17. Blakey, R.C., 1974, Stratigraphic and depositional analysis of the Moenkopi Formation, Southeastern Utah: Utah Geological Survey Bulletin 104, 81 p. Blakey, R.C., 1977, Petroliferous lithosomes in the Moenkopi Formation, Southern Utah: Utah Geology, vol. 4, no. 2, p. 67 84. Blakey, R.C., 1979, Oil impregnated carbonate rocks of the Timpoweap Member Moenkopi Formation, Hurricane Cliffs area, Utah and Arizona: Utah Geology, vol. 6, no. 1, p. 45 54. Blakey, R.C., 1979, Stratigraphy of the Supai Group (Pennsylvanian Permian), Mogollon Rim, Arizona: in Carboniferous Stratigraphy of the Grand Canyon Country, northern Arizona and southern Nevada, Field Trip No. 13, Ninth International Congress of Carboniferous Stratigraphy and Geology, p. 89 109. Blakey, R.C., 1979, Lower Permian stratigraphy of the southern Colorado Plateau: in Four Corners Geological Society, Guidebook to the Permian of the Colorado Plateau, p. 115 129. (PDF) Blakey, R.C., 1980, Pennsylvanian and Early Permian paleogeography, southern Colorado Plateau and vicinity: in Paleozoic Paleogeography of west central United States, Rocky Mountain Section, Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, p. 239 258. Blakey, R.C., Peterson, F., Caputo, M.V., Geesaman, R., and Voorhees, B., 1983, Paleogeography of Middle Jurassic continental, shoreline, and shallow marine sedimentation, southern Utah: Mesozoic PaleogeogÂraphy of west central United States, Rocky Mountain Section of Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists (Symposium), p.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 Paleozoic Stratigraphy of the Grand Canyon
    CHAPTER 2 PALEOZOIC STRATIGRAPHY OF THE GRAND CANYON PAIGE KERCHER INTRODUCTION The Paleozoic Era of the Phanerozoic Eon is defined as the time between 542 and 251 million years before the present (ICS 2010). The Paleozoic Era began with the evolution of most major animal phyla present today, sparked by the novel adaptation of skeletal hard parts. Organisms continued to diversify throughout the Paleozoic into increasingly adaptive and complex life forms, including the first vertebrates, terrestrial plants and animals, forests and seed plants, reptiles, and flying insects. Vast coal swamps covered much of mid- to low-latitude continental environments in the late Paleozoic as the supercontinent Pangaea began to amalgamate. The hardiest taxa survived the multiple global glaciations and mass extinctions that have come to define major time boundaries of this era. Paleozoic North America existed primarily at mid to low latitudes and experienced multiple major orogenies and continental collisions. For much of the Paleozoic, North America’s southwestern margin ran through Nevada and Arizona – California did not yet exist (Appendix B). The flat-lying Paleozoic rocks of the Grand Canyon, though incomplete, form a record of a continental margin repeatedly inundated and vacated by shallow seas (Appendix A). IMPORTANT STRATIGRAPHIC PRINCIPLES AND CONCEPTS • Principle of Original Horizontality – In most cases, depositional processes produce flat-lying sedimentary layers. Notable exceptions include blanketing ash sheets, and cross-stratification developed on sloped surfaces. • Principle of Superposition – In an undisturbed sequence, older strata lie below younger strata; a package of sedimentary layers youngs upward. • Principle of Lateral Continuity – A layer of sediment extends laterally in all directions until it naturally pinches out or abuts the walls of its confining basin.
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization and Hydraulic Behaviour of the Complex Karst of the Kaibab Plateau and Grand Canyon National Park, USA
    Characterization and hydraulic behaviour of the complex karst of the Kaibab Plateau and Grand Canyon National Park, USA CASEY J. R. JONES1, ABRAHAM E. SPRINGER1*, BENJAMIN W. TOBIN2, SARAH J. ZAPPITELLO2 & NATALIE A. JONES2 1School of Earth Sciences and Environmental Sustainability, Northern Arizona University, NAU Box 4099, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, USA 2Grand Canyon National Park, National Park Service, 1824 South Thompson Street, Flagstaff, AZ, 86001, USA *Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The Kaibab Plateau and Grand Canyon National Park in the USA contain both shallow and deep karst systems, which interact in ways that are not well known, although recent studies have allowed better interpretations of this unique system. Detailed characterization of sinkholes and their distribution on the surface using geographical information system and LiDAR data can be used to relate the infiltration points to the overall hydrogeological system. Flow paths through the deep regional geological structure were delineated using non-toxic fluorescent dyes. The flow character- istics of the coupled aquifer system were evaluated using hydrograph recession curve analysis via discharge data from Roaring Springs, the sole source of the water supply for the Grand Canyon National Park. The interactions between these coupled surface and deep karst systems are complex and challenging to understand. Although the surface karst behaves in much the same way as karst in other similar regions, the deep karst has a base flow recession coefficient an order of magnitude lower than many other karst aquifers throughout the world. Dye trace analysis reveals rapid, con- duit-dominated flow that demonstrates fracture connectivity along faults between the surface and deep karst.
    [Show full text]
  • Michael Kenney Paleozoic Stratigraphy of the Grand Canyon
    Michael Kenney Paleozoic Stratigraphy of the Grand Canyon The Paleozoic Era spans about 250 Myrs of Earth History from 541 Ma to 254 Ma (Figure 1). Within Grand Canyon National Park, there is a fragmented record of this time, which has undergone little to no deformation. These still relatively flat-lying, stratified layers, have been the focus of over 100 years of geologic studies. Much of what we know today began with the work of famed naturalist and geologist, Edwin Mckee (Beus and Middleton, 2003). His work, in addition to those before and after, have led to a greater understanding of sedimentation processes, fossil preservation, the evolution of life, and the drastic changes to Earth’s climate during the Paleozoic. This paper seeks to summarize, generally, the Paleozoic strata, the environments in which they were deposited, and the sources from which the sediments were derived. Tapeats Sandstone (~525 Ma – 515 Ma) The Tapeats Sandstone is a buff colored, quartz-rich sandstone and conglomerate, deposited unconformably on the Grand Canyon Supergroup and Vishnu metamorphic basement (Middleton and Elliott, 2003). Thickness varies from ~100 m to ~350 m depending on the paleotopography of the basement rocks upon which the sandstone was deposited. The base of the unit contains the highest abundance of conglomerates. Cobbles and pebbles sourced from the underlying basement rocks are common in the basal unit. Grain size and bed thickness thins upwards (Middleton and Elliott, 2003). Common sedimentary structures include planar and trough cross-bedding, which both decrease in thickness up-sequence. Fossils are rare but within the upper part of the sequence, body fossils date to the early Cambrian (Middleton and Elliott, 2003).
    [Show full text]
  • Grand Canyon
    U.S. Department of the Interior Geologic Investigations Series I–2688 14 Version 1.0 4 U.S. Geological Survey 167.5 1 BIG SPRINGS CORRELATION OF MAP UNITS LIST OF MAP UNITS 4 Pt Ph Pamphlet accompanies map .5 Ph SURFICIAL DEPOSITS Pk SURFICIAL DEPOSITS SUPAI MONOCLINE Pk Qr Holocene Qr Colorado River gravel deposits (Holocene) Qsb FAULT CRAZY JUG Pt Qtg Qa Qt Ql Pk Pt Ph MONOCLINE MONOCLINE 18 QUATERNARY Geologic Map of the Pleistocene Qtg Terrace gravel deposits (Holocene and Pleistocene) Pc Pk Pe 103.5 14 Qa Alluvial deposits (Holocene and Pleistocene) Pt Pc VOLCANIC ROCKS 45.5 SINYALA Qti Qi TAPEATS FAULT 7 Qhp Qsp Qt Travertine deposits (Holocene and Pleistocene) Grand Canyon ၧ DE MOTTE FAULT Pc Qtp M u Pt Pleistocene QUATERNARY Pc Qp Pe Qtb Qhb Qsb Ql Landslide deposits (Holocene and Pleistocene) Qsb 1 Qhp Ph 7 BIG SPRINGS FAULT ′ × ′ 2 VOLCANIC DEPOSITS Dtb Pk PALEOZOIC SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 30 60 Quadrangle, Mr Pc 61 Quaternary basalts (Pleistocene) Unconformity Qsp 49 Pk 6 MUAV FAULT Qhb Pt Lower Tuckup Canyon Basalt (Pleistocene) ၣm TRIASSIC 12 Triassic Qsb Ph Pk Mr Qti Intrusive dikes Coconino and Mohave Counties, Pe 4.5 7 Unconformity 2 3 Pc Qtp Pyroclastic deposits Mr 0.5 1.5 Mၧu EAST KAIBAB MONOCLINE Pk 24.5 Ph 1 222 Qtb Basalt flow Northwestern Arizona FISHTAIL FAULT 1.5 Pt Unconformity Dtb Pc Basalt of Hancock Knolls (Pleistocene) Pe Pe Mၧu Mr Pc Pk Pk Pk NOBLE Pt Qhp Qhb 1 Mၧu Pyroclastic deposits Qhp 5 Pe Pt FAULT Pc Ms 12 Pc 12 10.5 Lower Qhb Basalt flows 1 9 1 0.5 PERMIAN By George H.
    [Show full text]
  • Subsurface Geologic Plates of Eastern Arizona and Western New Mexico
    Implications of Live Oil Shows in an Eastern Arizona Geothermal Test (1 Alpine-Federal) by Steven L. Rauzi Oil and Gas Program Administrator Arizona Geological Survey Open-File Report 94-1 Version 2.0 June, 2009 Arizona Geological Survey 416 W. Congress St., #100, Tucson, Arizona 85701 INTRODUCTION The 1 Alpine-Federal geothermal test, at an elevation of 8,556 feet in eastern Arizona, was drilled by the Arizona Department of Commerce and U.S. Department of Energy to obtain information about the hot-dry-rock potential of Precambrian rocks in the Alpine-Nutrioso area, a region of extensive basaltic volcanism in southern Apache County. The hole reached total depth of 4,505 feet in August 1993. Temperature measurements were taken through October 1993 when final temperature, gamma ray, and neutron logs were run. The Alpine-Federal hole is located just east of U.S. Highway 180/191 (old 180/666) at the divide between Alpine and Nutrioso, in sec. 23, T. 6 N., R. 30 E., in the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest (Fig. 1). The town of Alpine is about 6 miles south of the wellsite and the Arizona-New Mexico state line is about 6 miles east. The basaltic Springerville volcanic field is just north of the wellsite (Crumpler, L.S., Aubele, J.C., and Condit, C.D., 1994). Although volcanic rocks of middle Miocene to Oligocene age (Reynolds, 1988) are widespread in the region, erosion has removed them from the main valleys between Alpine and Nutrioso. As a result, the 1 Alpine-Federal was spudded in sedimentary strata of Oligocene to Eocene age (Reynolds, 1988).
    [Show full text]
  • USGS General Information Product
    Geologic Field Photograph Map of the Grand Canyon Region, 1967–2010 General Information Product 189 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior DAVID BERNHARDT, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey James F. Reilly II, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2019 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit https://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit https://store.usgs.gov. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner. Suggested citation: Billingsley, G.H., Goodwin, G., Nagorsen, S.E., Erdman, M.E., and Sherba, J.T., 2019, Geologic field photograph map of the Grand Canyon region, 1967–2010: U.S. Geological Survey General Information Product 189, 11 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/gip189. ISSN 2332-354X (online) Cover. Image EF69 of the photograph collection showing the view from the Tonto Trail (foreground) toward Indian Gardens (greenery), Bright Angel Fault, and Bright Angel Trail, which leads up to the south rim at Grand Canyon Village. Fault offset is down to the east (left) about 200 feet at the rim.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 9. Paleozoic Vertebrate Ichnology of Grand Canyon National Park
    Chapter 9. Paleozoic Vertebrate Ichnology of Grand Canyon National Park By Lorenzo Marchetti1, Heitor Francischini2, Spencer G. Lucas3, Sebastian Voigt1, Adrian P. Hunt4, and Vincent L. Santucci5 1Urweltmuseum GEOSKOP / Burg Lichtenberg (Pfalz) Burgstraße 19 D-66871 Thallichtenberg, Germany 2Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) Laboratório de Paleontologia de Vertebrados and Programa de Pós-Graduação em Geociências, Instituto de Geociências Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil 3New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science 1801 Mountain Road N.W. Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87104 4Flying Heritage and Combat Armor Museum 3407 109th St SW Everett, Washington 98204 5National Park Service Geologic Resources Division 1849 “C” Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20240 Introduction Vertebrate tracks are the only fossils of terrestrial vertebrates known from Paleozoic strata of Grand Canyon National Park (GRCA), therefore they are of great importance for the reconstruction of the extinct faunas of this area. For more than 100 years, the upper Paleozoic strata of the Grand Canyon yielded a noteworthy vertebrate track collection, in terms of abundance, completeness and quality of preservation. These are key requirements for a classification of tracks through ichnotaxonomy. This chapter proposes a complete ichnotaxonomic revision of the track collections from GRCA and is also based on a large amount of new material. These Paleozoic tracks were produced by different tetrapod groups, such as eureptiles, parareptiles, synapsids and anamniotes, and their size ranges from 0.5 to 20 cm (0.2 to 7.9 in) footprint length. As the result of the irreversibility of the evolutionary process, they provide useful information about faunal composition, faunal events, paleobiogeographic distribution and biostratigraphy.
    [Show full text]
  • Sessions Calendar
    Associated Societies GSA has a long tradition of collaborating with a wide range of partners in pursuit of our mutual goals to advance the geosciences, enhance the professional growth of society members, and promote the geosciences in the service of humanity. GSA works with other organizations on many programs and services. AASP - The American Association American Geophysical American Institute American Quaternary American Rock Association for the Palynological Society of Petroleum Union (AGU) of Professional Association Mechanics Association Sciences of Limnology and Geologists (AAPG) Geologists (AIPG) (AMQUA) (ARMA) Oceanography (ASLO) American Water Asociación Geológica Association for Association of Association of Earth Association of Association of Geoscientists Resources Association Argentina (AGA) Women Geoscientists American State Science Editors Environmental & Engineering for International (AWRA) (AWG) Geologists (AASG) (AESE) Geologists (AEG) Development (AGID) Blueprint Earth (BE) The Clay Minerals Colorado Scientifi c Council on Undergraduate Cushman Foundation Environmental & European Association Society (CMS) Society (CSS) Research Geosciences (CF) Engineering Geophysical of Geoscientists & Division (CUR) Society (EEGS) Engineers (EAGE) European Geosciences Geochemical Society Geologica Belgica Geological Association Geological Society of Geological Society of Geological Society of Union (EGU) (GS) (GB) of Canada (GAC) Africa (GSAF) Australia (GSAus) China (GSC) Geological Society of Geological Society of Geologische Geoscience
    [Show full text]
  • A Hiker's Companion to GRAND CANYON GEOLOGY
    A Hiker’s Companion to GRAND CANYON GEOLOGY With special attention given to The Corridor: North & South Kaibab Trails Bright Angel Trail The geologic history of the Grand Canyon can be approached by breaking it up into three puzzles: 1. How did all those sweet layers get there? 2. How did the area become uplifted over a mile above sea level? 3. How and when was the canyon carved out? That’s how this short guide is organized, into three sections: 1. Laying down the Strata, 2. Uplift, and 3. Carving the Canyon, Followed by a walking geological guide to the 3 most popular hikes in the National Park. I. LAYING DOWN THE STRATA PRE-CAMBRIAN 2000 mya (million years ago), much of the planet’s uppermost layer was thin oceanic crust, and plate tectonics was functioning more or less as it does now. It begins with a Subduction Zone... Vishnu Schist: 1840 mya, the GC region was the site of an active subduction zone, crowned by a long volcanic chain known as the Yavapai Arc (similar to today’s Aleutian Islands). The oceanic crust on the leading edge of Wyomingland, a huge plate driving in from the NW, was subducting under another plate at the zone, a terrane known as the Yavapai Province. Subduction brought Wyomingland closer and closer to the arc for 150 million years, during which genera- tions of volcanoes were born and laid dormant along the arc. Lava and ash of new volcanoes mixed with the eroded sands and mud from older cones, creating a pile of inter-bedded lava, ash, sand, and mud that was 40,000 feet deep! Vishnu Schist Zoroaster Granite Wyomingland reached the subduction zone 1700 mya.
    [Show full text]
  • A 16Th-Century Spanish Inscription in Grand Canyon? a Hypothesis
    58 PARK SCIENCE • VOLUME 27 • NUMBER 2 • FALL 2010 Science Feature A 16th-century Spanish inscription in Grand Canyon? A hypothesis By Ray Kenny HE AMAZING JOURNEY OF Francisco Vásquez de Coronado Tis well-known to historians as well as afi cionados of the human history at Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona. A handful of Spaniards sent by Coronado from New Mexico fi rst visited the Grand Canyon in September 1540. The story of the fi rst visitation is told in many books and is based upon interpretations from George Parker Winship’s 1892 translation of the accounts of Coronado’s journey written by members of the expedition (De Coronado 1892). As told by Winship in an introduction to the account of Coronado’s journey: It was perhaps on July 4th, 1540 that Coronado drew up his force in front of the fi rst of the “Seven Cities,” and after a sharp fi ght forced his way into the stronghold, the stone and adobe- Spanish conquistador DRAWING BY FREDERIC REMINGTON; PHOTO COPYRIGHT CORBIS built pueblo of Hawikuh, whose ruins can still be traced on a low hillock a few miles southwest of the village now occupied by the New Mexican Zuñi village and returned to Coronado with air line across to the other bank of the Indians. Here the Europeans camped the information he had secured from the stream which fl owed between them. for several weeks. … A small party was Native Americans. Upon learning about sent off toward the northwest, where the news of a large river in the arid lands, The exact location where Cárdenas and another group of seven villages was found.
    [Show full text]
  • 62. Origin of Horseshoe Bend, Arizona, and the Navajo and Coconino Sandstones, Grand Canyon − Flood Geology Disproved
    62. Origin of Horseshoe Bend, Arizona, and the Navajo and Coconino Sandstones, Grand Canyon − Flood Geology Disproved Lorence G. Collins July 1, 2020 Email address: [email protected] Abstract Young-Earth creationists (YEC) claim that Horseshoe Bend in Arizona was carved by the Colorado River soon after Noah's Flood had deposited sedimentary rocks during the year of the Flood about 4,400 years ago. Its receding waters are what entrenched the Colorado River in a U-shaped horseshoe bend. Conventional geology suggests that the Colorado River was once a former meandering river flowing on a broad floodplain, and as tectonic uplift pushed up northern Arizona, the river slowly cut down through the sediments while still preserving its U-shaped bend. Both the Jurassic Navajo Sandstone at Horseshoe Bend, and the underlying Permian Coconino Sandstone exposed in the Grand Canyon, are claimed by YECs to be deposited by Noah's Flood while producing underwater, giant, cross-bedded dunes. Conventional geology interprets that these cross-bedded dunes were formed in a desert environment by blowing wind. Evidence is presented in this article to show examples of features that cannot be explained by the creationists' Flood geology model. Introduction The purpose of this article is two-fold. The first is to demonstrate that the physical features of the Navajo and Coconino sandstones at Horseshoe Bend and in the Grand Canyon National Park are best understood by contemporary geology as aeolian sand dunes deposited by blowing wind. The second is to describe how Horseshoe Bend and the Grand Canyon were formed by the Colorado River slowly meandering across a flat floodplain and eroding the Bend and the Canyon over a few million years as plate tectonic forces deep in the earth’s crust uplifted northern Arizona and southern Utah.
    [Show full text]