CAtoPA Posted July 21, 2016 Share Posted July 21, 2016 Hello Pros! While hiking along Indian Creek Trail in Northampton, PA, (southeastern PA)... I noticed that some of the shale along the river looked like it was once a river bank, or the shore along a beach. It's all stone, but looks like water is moving sand/silt into those little mounds you see anytime you're at a water's edge. Does anyone know what era this would be from? I took photos, as the pieces were probably around 500# or more, soooo... about 5xs my weight! I wanted to carry it home, though! It looks really beautiful. Thanks in advance for any info you all can give me! I just want to understand the area better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted July 21, 2016 Share Posted July 21, 2016 This is a trace fossil(?) called ripple marks. They form under water or at the water's edge. I do not know why they are considered a fossil since they are not a structure created by the action of a biological critter. Others should be able to narrow the age. Tony 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 More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted July 21, 2016 Share Posted July 21, 2016 (edited) If they are ripple marks,you can't use them for dating,as a matter of definition.They're not confined to (a) particular (part of) the stratigraphical column. They're non-biogenic sedimentological structures. And: a very COOL FIND Edited July 21, 2016 by doushantuo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted July 21, 2016 Share Posted July 21, 2016 If they are ripple marks,you can't use them for dating,as a matter of definition.They're not confined to (a) particular (part of) the stratigraphical column This is true, but they can be dated by the formation if it is known. Tony 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 More sharing options...
CAtoPA Posted July 21, 2016 Author Share Posted July 21, 2016 If they are ripple marks,you can't use them for dating,as a matter of definition.They're not confined to (a) particular (part of) the stratigraphical column. They're non-biogenic sedimentological structures. And: a very COOL FIND Thanks! I thought they were interesting. This is true, but they can be dated by the formation if it is known. Tony I'm not sure how to find out about the area. I'm going to need to join a geology or fossil club in this area!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted July 21, 2016 Share Posted July 21, 2016 (edited) I'm not sure how to find out about the area. I'm going to need to join a geology or fossil club in this area!! You can look at some geological maps of the area to try and find the ages/formations in the area. Tony PS Joining a local club is a good idea, because they often have collecting trips to good locations. and lots of members to help ID things. Edited July 21, 2016 by ynot 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 More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted July 21, 2016 Share Posted July 21, 2016 (edited) Is this of ANY use,CA? https://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/1194l/report.pdf or this: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/0033/report.pdf plate/map: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/0033/plate-1.pdf Miller(places of..,etc) http://digital.lib.lehigh.edu/lvgeology/guidebook.pdf Edited July 21, 2016 by doushantuo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CraigHyatt Posted July 21, 2016 Share Posted July 21, 2016 (edited) Search your location (e.g. your county) on the US Geological Survey. For example: maverick county texas usgs I always check wiki, though doushantuo disapproves. ;-) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleontology_in_Pennsylvania I mean, here's but one example of priceless knowledge from the above wiki article. "Local Delaware people used to smoke mixtures of fossil bones and tobacco for good luck and to have wishes granted." I am going to test this scientifically right now. Not sure I have any tobacco, though. Or fossil bones. Edited July 21, 2016 by CraigHyatt Info: Craig Hyatt, retired software/electrical engineer Experience: Beginner, fossil hunting less than a year Location: Eagle Pass, TX USA on the border with Mexico, hot dry desert Formation: Escondido, Marine, Upper Cretaceous Materials: Sandstone, Mudstone, Shale, Chert, Chalk Typical: Thalassinoides, Sphenodiscus, Exogyra, Inoceramus Reference: http://txfossils.com/Txfossils.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossilcrazy Posted July 21, 2016 Share Posted July 21, 2016 (edited) The overall picture looks like wave ripple marks. On closer examination, I see small patterned gouges that are telling me more like sedimentary mud flutes. In New York Upper Devonian Shales, we see a lot of sedimentary structures from simple Ripple marks to complex submarine activity. Commonplace rock have very curious features that one can get to recognize quickly. Using Google Image you will see examples of things like: Turbidites, Seismites, Convolutes, Cross Bedding, Load casts, Flute casts, Ripple marks, Septarian nodules. All these things make for an interesting walk along creeks looking for fossils or traces. Edited July 21, 2016 by fossilcrazy 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAtoPA Posted July 21, 2016 Author Share Posted July 21, 2016 Is this of ANY use,CA? https://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/1194l/report.pdf or this: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/0033/report.pdf plate/map: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/0033/plate-1.pdf Miller(places of..,etc) http://digital.lib.lehigh.edu/lvgeology/guidebook.pdf Thanks, Doushantuo! The first document is very interesting! The second one is cool, but hard to read, ha ha. Thank you so much!! I'll check out the last one, too... I do live in the Lehigh Valley, so this should be very informative!! I appreciate your help!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrangellian Posted July 21, 2016 Share Posted July 21, 2016 This is a trace fossil(?) called ripple marks. They form under water or at the water's edge. I do not know why they are considered a fossil since they are not a structure created by the action of a biological critter. ? I have not heard that ripple marks are called fossils or even trace fossils, since as you say they are not created by a living critter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossilcrazy Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 ? I have not heard that ripple marks are called fossils or even trace fossils, since as you say they are not created by a living critter. You are correct Wrangellian, in that the "fossils" are not Biological in origin, and would not fit the definition of fossils. We can cut some slack for the folks just familiarizing themselves with our topic. I for one have called "fossil raindrops" knowing darn well they would not be fossils or even Pseudofossils. It's unscientific, but we all understand jargon or folklore terms for natural items having been described and a formal nomenclature been assigned. I laugh at myself for ideas and concepts I held while an ignorant newbie. It wasn't being an idiot, it was using what I knew to explain what I didn't know. I guess after all, that is kind of what science does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrangellian Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Yes, I know lots of things are called fossil-this or fossilized-that, but I thought Tony (or the source he might be quoting) was beyond just familiarizing himself with the topic... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CraigHyatt Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Yes, I know lots of things are called fossil-this or fossilized-that, but I thought Tony (or the source he might be quoting) was beyond just familiarizing himself with the topic... Personally, I consider it jargon. Not technically correct, but gets the point across without being unwieldy. Sort of like when people talk about their "disc drive" being full even when it's solid state and has no discs or drive. But that's just me.... not a big stickler for precision as long as everybody gets the gist and has a good time. :-) Info: Craig Hyatt, retired software/electrical engineer Experience: Beginner, fossil hunting less than a year Location: Eagle Pass, TX USA on the border with Mexico, hot dry desert Formation: Escondido, Marine, Upper Cretaceous Materials: Sandstone, Mudstone, Shale, Chert, Chalk Typical: Thalassinoides, Sphenodiscus, Exogyra, Inoceramus Reference: http://txfossils.com/Txfossils.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrangellian Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 ? I have not heard that ripple marks are called fossils or even trace fossils, since as you say they are not created by a living critter. I have seen "Park guides" call them (and things like sand dunes) "fossils" of an ecosystem. (It never made sense to Me). Yes, I know lots of things are called fossil-this or fossilized-that, but I thought Tony (or the source he might be quoting) was beyond just familiarizing himself with the topic... That is why I put a question mark in the sentence. Thank You for clarifying the matter! It is one of the drawbacks to never having taken a course in geology or paleontology, I have to trudge through the mud of misinformation out there. Tony 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 More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 (edited) some etymology: a Fossil is (original meaning): "anything dug up". So:anything coming out of the ground. and remember ,we humans are lazy: "fossil" as an adjective is shorter than "fossilized" A turbidte is a km-sized structure*,so you can't see it unless you're standing miles away from it. *or even tens of kilometers The individuals Bouma units can't be recognized in the field by themselves,they can only be seen in context. Edited July 22, 2016 by doushantuo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrangellian Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 I have seen "Park guides" call them (and things like sand dunes) "fossils" of an ecosystem. (It never made sense to Me). Yes, I guess you can expect anything from a park guide! And maybe they are trying to use terms that Joe Public will understand too.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 (edited) I think the park guides are correct in their phraseology. Edited July 22, 2016 by doushantuo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Rather than fossil(ized) I think a better term would be "lithified evidence of the ecosystem". Tony 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 More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 i could live with that . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmaier Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Rather than fossil(ized) I think a better term would be "lithified evidence of the ecosystem". OK, but I think saying "petrified water" would be going too far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 that would be called "ice", I think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Wouldn't the H2O have to be replaced by another mineral to be "petrified"? Tony 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 More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 (edited) there is such a thing as fossil water,BTW. Fluid inclusions(yes, i know my metamorphic petrology )contain fossil water,CO2,and other elements look at eg. fig 3 in the following: http://geology.nwu.edu.cn:81/jxyd/ebook/stru/data/zlwx/zl/3.pdf (bit of a slow download) Edited July 22, 2016 by doushantuo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now