Geneological Geology

You are making assumptions. Israel doesn’t exist, Abraham doesn’t exist and now Israel was never in Israel. I guess the holocaust didn’t happen either. And If Mankind was around 60 or 100 million years, to suggest they did not use camels is naive. They were literally smelting tin and Gold… I guess its all a conspiracy to you. Funny you can still dig up the cites mentioned in the bible that Archeologists couldn’t find without the bibles help. Historically the bible is the Archeologists best friend.
Here is a fun fact. Something Science still hasn’t admitted. The sediment layers in the grand canyon show that land was under water the same sediment is found on every continent. And all those sediments are ocean layers. so you push those down so they are under the water… Guess what. The whole world would be under water. Forget Noah, thats later. But Moses had writers record Genesis and it says the whole world was under the water in the beginning. Even Science doesn’t even grasp that yet, they think those layers have land animals in them. at least school children do… Land animals, not even Giraffes live in water.
Lets throw in a cool one. The Claim that Whales were first on land because they have a hip like bone and then went back into the ocean. Where in the fossil record in those layers is the whale and how interesting that the whale then and whale now are similar. So here we have a World history in stone, written in the bible before America even existed and their understanding of the geology of the world is ahead of todays Science.
The Point is God gave the writer of the bible knowledge about the whole world people today don’t have and its written in the first chapter of Genesis. The whole world was under water. The Bible is not so shabby after all.

This is just not true for several reasons. First, the Grand Canyon includes both marine and terrestrial sediments. Second the same sediments are not on all the continents except in the vaguest possible sense, i.e. that continents have sandstone, shale, and so on. But they aren’t the same layers or of the same ages. There has never been a time in the last several billion years in which the whole world was under water.

You need to look more closely at the fossil record of whales. The whales then and now aren’t similar. Look up Pakicetus, Rodhocetus, Ambulocetus, and others. It’s not just a “hip like bone”. They have legs.

Sorry, no. There is no knowledge about the world in the first chapter of Genesis.


I think you will find all the fossils are on the top. That they are non-conformity… from mudslides or special events. Whales in Chili for example. Chili has a habit of having massive uplift. If I remember correctly they have evidence that they had uplift of 70 ft in just a few days… Those whales seem to have been captured buy some special event and are on top… not buried a KM down.
The same can be said for Dinosaurs in Alberta. Maybe its proof of a global or local flood. They ran to a safe place and then they were drown.
You should do research to find out how many actual fossils are in the grand canyon IN the rock walls, not on the floor… I think you will find that there is next no nothing significant except at the top. I think there is 21 layers in the grand canyon but only 5 periods. If you look you can see where things stopped and started. Maybe that was over thousands of years or hundreds of years. I wasn’t there.
But there is one clear thing, there is no bones in those layers.

No fossils have been reported from the Shinumo Quartzite.[2][5][6]

Not sure if the last post I posted will get through because there is a link in it. I googled Shinumo Quartzite. and scrolled down to a part in the wiki link to where it says: No [fossils] have been reported from the Shinumo Quartzite. So to be clear what I am saying is there is a misconception that the grand canyon represents the fossil record and a journey through time. the fossil record is Not the grand canyon.

That isn’t even a grammatical sentence. No, fossils are all through the sedimentary record, whether on top or otherwise. Drill cores from a mile or more down often have fossils in them.

I usually find beans and peppers, not whales.

No, none of that is true.

You may think that, but is your thought based on anything at all? Here: Fossils - Grand Canyon National Park (U.S. National Park Service)

With good reason. Quartzite is a metamorphic rock.


The Shinumo Quartzite is not the Grand Canyon either. What’s your point in being so selective, Scott?


And the only fossils in rock of that era are stromatolites. Fossils of land animals are much younger, and appear in the Kaibab limestone near the rim.


Stromatolites, of course, do not happen in sandstone, and if they did they would not survive the metamorphism that turns sandstones into quartzite.


now stop that. be honest. your link proves it. opposite to what you say. the fossils you are finding are literally the top layer. THE TOP LAYER Kaibab Limestone.

So no life for all of it. then shells on the top. funny. sort of eliminates the grand canyon for a geologic column of fossils.

Shimumo Quartzite was just mentioned in the link I had. that is all. And it categorically said no bones are found in that layer.

Wouldn’t that depend on the degree of melting and defirmation?
Never a geologist around when we need one. :wink:

Nor does anyone expect bones in those layers, because there were no animals with bones for another ~500 million years. The Redwall limestone is made up of the micro fossils of sea creatures and underlies the Kaibab (kaibab, supai, temple butte, then redwall). Stromatolite are known to date back billions of years, but I’m not aware of any older than ~500 million years in the Grand Canyon (like this one).


That’s my point. One link and you act like you’ve mastered geology and paleontology. You’re not looking for any truth, are you?

1 Like

Topic split. There’s a clear divergence from Geneology to Geology. :smiley:


Quartz sandstone doesn’t melt to form quartzite; it recrystallizes. Individual sand grains just go away. How likely that fossils would remain?

I note that @Evolution_is_a_Hoax is equivocating at top speed, confusing quartzite with sedimentary rock, marine with terrestrial environments, fossils with vertebrate fossils, and bones with shells.


I find that some silica-cemented sandstones are occasionally called “quartzite”, though they are not metamorphic, and these may sometimes contain fossils. But that’s not what’s in the Grand Canyon.

Whoops, I also find that the Shinumo “Quartzite” is indeed really a well-cemented sandstone, not a metamorphic rock. However, it’s over a billion years old, well before any animal or plant life existed. Memo to self: check before typing in future.


It could be misunderstanding, give it time.

Should it be given as much time as @John_Harshman has given RTB? Months and months now. I don’t disagree that patience with someone who clearly hasn’t bothered to learn the facts he’s addressing can sometimes be helpful, but experience does teach that “sometimes” does not mean “often.” And this does not look like a case where someone is about to smarten up and shape up.


A bit older. Large stromatolite masses are found in the upper Chuar Group about 750 Ma.

You can see the Cardenas volcanics in the background.

Here’s a close-up showing the structure. Scale of the pic is about 30 cm.


The handle he chose is a pretty big tell. Dan, would you like to put some money on whether it’s misunderstanding?

1 Like