Jump to content

Still_human

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Rockwood said:

My thought was focused toward the larger picture. Scientists seek fact. Too often social groups function to support the cause regardless of the facts.

So I'm not scientific enough?

 

Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger

http://www.steinkern.de/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ludwigia said:

So I'm not scientific enough?

You are among the most scientific people I have had the pleasure to encounter. I'm trying to agree that my concerns of bias being introduced are unwarranted in a group of scientists. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

You are among the most scientific people I have had the pleasure to encounter. I'm trying to agree that my concerns of bias being introduced are unwarranted in a group of scientists. 

Gotcha! :) Just to let you know that I appreciate your role here as devil's advocate. I see your point that social media do sometimes have a tendency to bandwagon mentality.

 

Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger

http://www.steinkern.de/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to consider the politics that I see on the news in this country lately. Confidence in humanity is difficult these days. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rockwood said:

Confidence in humanity is difficult these days.

Very sad to hear and I think this is a global feeling. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ludwigia said:

Gotcha! :) Just to let you know that I appreciate your role here as devil's advocate. I see your point that social media do sometimes have a tendency to bandwagon mentality.

We are a refreshing refuge in this era of an increasingly heated political climate. We are the social part of the social media.

My goal is to leave no stone or fossil unturned.   

See my Arizona Paleontology Guide    link  The best single resource for Arizona paleontology anywhere.       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/19/2018 at 1:07 AM, ynot said:

:headscratch:Very faulty logic. By this reasoning are not most fossils found near or on the surface? Would this mean that they were never buried very deep?

Sorry, i mispoke there--I meant for the entire history of a fossil, not just when discovered--never being buried and crushed under what was miles of sediment, and taking millions of years of erosion to expose, as many(most, even?) fossils are, but being fossilized at or near the surface, avoiding the crushing pressures. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Still_human said:

-never being buried and crushed under what was miles of sediment, and taking millions of years of erosion to expose, as many(most, even?) fossils are, but being fossilized at or near the surface, avoiding the crushing pressures. 

Without that crushing pressure sediment can not be lithified.

Darwin said: " Man sprang from monkeys."

Will Rogers said: " Some of them didn't spring far enough."

 

My Fossil collection - My Mineral collection

My favorite thread on TFF.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ynot said:

Without that crushing pressure sediment can not be lithified.

Don't forget about the carbonates and early diagenetic cementation such as beachrock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Still_human said:

I don't think that's the case.

I suspect the key word may be sediment. Geologist may technically exclude evaporites and the like @ynot ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/20/2018 at 7:12 AM, ynot said:

Without that crushing pressure sediment can not be lithified.

EDIT: this comment is in partial reply to a now hidden comment by Still human where he says that sedimentary rocks can form (and harden) on and near the surface. 

 

Still human is correct; rocks can lithify near surface. In desert areas including Arizona, groundwater deposits limestone (AKA) caliche) that cements, sand, gravel and cobbles a few feet down to form a hard rock layer that is the bane of gardeners.

My goal is to leave no stone or fossil unturned.   

See my Arizona Paleontology Guide    link  The best single resource for Arizona paleontology anywhere.       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

I suspect the key word may be sediment. Geologist may technically exclude evaporites and the like @ynot ?

I had not considered evaporites as they seldom, if ever, are associated with fossils.

Darwin said: " Man sprang from monkeys."

Will Rogers said: " Some of them didn't spring far enough."

 

My Fossil collection - My Mineral collection

My favorite thread on TFF.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, DPS Ammonite said:

Still human is correct; rocks can lithify near surface. In desert areas including Arizona, groundwater deposits limestone (AKA) caliche) that cements, sand, gravel and cobbles a few feet down to form a hard rock layer that is the bane of gardeners.

Still human was saying that ripple marks had to be fossilized at or near the surface or would be destroyed by the pressure of overlying rock.

That is not a correct statement.

 

My comment was a generalization that does have exceptions. There are also lahares and lava flows that lithify on the surface almost instantly.

Darwin said: " Man sprang from monkeys."

Will Rogers said: " Some of them didn't spring far enough."

 

My Fossil collection - My Mineral collection

My favorite thread on TFF.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, ynot said:

Still human was saying that ripple marks had to be fossilized at or near the surface or would be destroyed by the pressure of overlying rock.

That is not a correct statement.

 

I agree with you ynot; ripples can be preserved in rocks that have been exposed to some pressure. Ripples are preserved in some low grade quartzites that were once sand.

My goal is to leave no stone or fossil unturned.   

See my Arizona Paleontology Guide    link  The best single resource for Arizona paleontology anywhere.       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ynot said:

Still human was saying that ripple marks had to be fossilized at or near the surface or would be destroyed by the pressure of overlying rock.

That is not a correct statement.

Actually, thats not what I said. I said "it seems like". This is one of those mistakes that haunts you lol. I try to make sure I never make things definitive, unless I know it to be true, by including "isn't it?", "right?", "I could be wrong, but...", "id imagine" etc, but I forgot to add that at the end of that sentence and of COURSE it had to be one to make such a splash :doh!:

 

actually though, ynot, I'm glad you brought up those trace fossils, because I had never really given too much thought about their specific process. I had a general idea, but until you asked, I guess it had never come up, so I guess what I knew about it wasn't specific enough. You don't always realize what kinds of things you don't know until they come up. Although sedimentary rock can definitely be formed by a number of ways other than with heat or pressure, not all sedimentary rocks carry fossils, so I'm not sure what would actually be taken into consideration for surface/near surface fossilization. Ive been trying to look it up but everything Ive found seems to get pretty General at this point, and leaves out the specific fossilization process for them, about par with my previous knowledge of it. How exactly ARE they specifically formed? 

 

*Ynot, when you mention lava lithifying, I think you meant something else. Lava is an igneous rock, and lithify is a sedementary word.

 

2 hours ago, DPS Ammonite said:

I agree with you ynot; ripples can be preserved in rocks that have been exposed to some pressure. Ripples are preserved in some low grade quartzites that were once sand.

Can you elaborate at all(preserved in low grade quartzites from sand)? Are you referring to that being the standard process, or an additional process?

 

*what exactly do you mean by some pressure? I was specifically talking about huge "crushing" pressures from "miles of sediment". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Still_human said:

*Ynot, when you mention lava lithifying, I think you meant something else. Lava is an igneous rock, and lithify is a sedementary word.

Lithify = turn to stone.

This can apply to any liquid or unsolidified biologic or mineral material that becomes stone.

It is not exclusive to sedimentary rock.

There was a discussion about fossils in volcanic rock a while back, and some felt lahares and lava flows to be sedimentary type rock.

Darwin said: " Man sprang from monkeys."

Will Rogers said: " Some of them didn't spring far enough."

 

My Fossil collection - My Mineral collection

My favorite thread on TFF.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/21/2018 at 7:43 PM, piranha said:

Update: The Anomalocaris appendage sold for $406.99 USD

Yeah, impRESSive!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 10/21/2018 at 7:22 PM, ynot said:

Lithify = turn to stone.

This can apply to any liquid or unsolidified biologic or mineral material that becomes stone.

It is not exclusive to sedimentary rock.

There was a discussion about fossils in volcanic rock a while back, and some felt lahares and lava flows to be sedimentary type rock.

I believe I see where the misunderstanding came from. Most places use "to turn to stone", or close to it for the example phrase, which definitely sounds all-inclusive, but everywhere I looked specifically says it's sediment turning to stone or rock. One place says 'or other materials', but they seem to be referring to other sedimentary materials, such as with conglomerates. I'm not going to say that I'm definitely right, I'm just going by what I'm seeing.

*other than the picture below, i didn't include any links because I just googled "lithify", and looked at most of the first page of results, which seems easier than leaving 10 links:faint:

IMG_8256.PNG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ynot, this link you provided for us before seems to no longer work, you wouldn't happen to have another way to pull it up, do you?

IMG_8261.PNG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Fossildude19  @Kane

I just made this link to above thread and it will not work.

Is there something wrong with the system?

 

 

Darwin said: " Man sprang from monkeys."

Will Rogers said: " Some of them didn't spring far enough."

 

My Fossil collection - My Mineral collection

My favorite thread on TFF.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fixed. ;) 

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png      PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png     Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg    VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png  VFOTM  --- APRIL - 2015  

__________________________________________________
"In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks."

John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~   ><))))( *>  About Me      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, ynot said:

@Fossildude19  @Kane

I just made this link to above thread and it will not work.

Is there something wrong with the system?

 

 

 

20 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

Fixed. ;) 

Thanks so much you guys, I'm so happy you got it working again! Those are absolutely mind blowing! Even knowing that's how they actually look, my mind just CANT see them as being really like that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...