Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'twin cities'.
Found 1 result
I found plenty of myths onlines, books, media. One recent Star Tribune article on landscape rocks called Platteville limestone from ancient lake. Not true at all! Actually it is mostly dolomite with small amounts of limestone and shale mixed in. Minnesota DNR website under fossil list says that shark teeth are found all over the Twin Cities and sounds like its common as heck. Actually its not true. Glaciers would had grounded them to dust. I think the myth comes from the fact that they occurs in central Minnesota (buried very deep under soil) or most likely from western Minnesota via the Minnesota River. So its possible to find them from Minnesota River Valley through where it meets the Mississippi River. Sounds easy? Not really.... most of the Minnesota River Valley of the Twin Cities are mostly inaccessible except from boat. And even then, the low flow rate of the Minnesota River would likely bury any shark teeth that washed downriver as beds of pebbles are hard to find. Several sources report that both the Mississippi River and Minnesota River deposits more sediments on the valley floor than wash them out. In fact the best odds for finding shark teeth are if theres a big flood going down the Minnesota River that covered the entire floodplain, washing plant debris, etc off and carve new cuts through the valley floor that exposes layers of deposited river rocks. Lastly Ordovician fossils - a myth is that they are well study in the Twin Cities - no they are not. Many fossils that I finds don't have specimen names just genus since they are poorly researched and new rare ones show up all the time that I suspect are new undescribed species. I feel that the vast majority of professions in the fossil field are mainly focused on the Cretaceous fossil beds in the Iron Range. They didn't really impress me that much, being mostly cast fossils and heavily stained in iron so its harder to see any fine details as they are dark as heck.