Erosion and Deposition animation

This animation was done to illustrate the erosion deposition geologic cycle at work along the front range of the Rockies when the Garden of the Gods was deposited.
Contact: Mark4Lewis@Comcast.net

Category:

Film & Animation

Tags:

• garden
• gods
• colorado
• bryce
• animation
• illustration
• graphic
• lewis
• peakpixels

[PeakPixels]

I'm working on a new and improved version of this right now.

Stay tuned.

[crustyandhomer]

My class watched this in school. :D

[PeakPixels]

Cool!

Your teacher asked for permission to use it in the classroom, which was a great compliment. It's not all that good but does get the point across about geologic time and the effects.

BTW, Crusty the Clown is my favorite.

[pachelbelrox]

very interesting

[Reality9O]

Nicely done, until about 0:20 where it became abit too fast and fuzzy

[msjessypp]

great video thanks

[xtremetom180]

interesting video and very informative

[osclarkos]

good work here

[pilgrimpater]

@ironman197268 That'll be fossilised, not petrified. NB most are ammonites. Fossils can't find their way into solid rock, so for a catastrophe they would have have to be buried (despite already living under water) somehow avoiding being grouped with other sea bed organisms ( we don't find them in the Himalaya fossil record at the level we are talking about, e.g. lobsters, crabs, etc. Then they would need to fossilise & sediments would need to go through lithification & being upturned. No way.

[ironman197268]

@pilgrimpater Fossils may not decay but, everything erodes, including petrified oysters and clams. Another interesting thing is those oysters and clams are petrified in the CLOSED position. Sounds like they got buried, killed, petrified and uncovered in a hurry.

[pilgrimpater]

@ironman197268 You are right. My explanation of the erosion of the fossil bearing sediments doesn't explain how they got there and nor is it intended to do so (naturally i can supply the answer but we are talking erosion). By the way fossils do not decay (they are mineral) and you appear to have now gone full circle and repeated your original assertion. Again, i point out that you are assuming high erosion rates from mere wind (and i'm not talking flatulence, LOL).

[ironman197268]

@pilgrimpater Sorry Man, but that doesn't explain why those oysters and clams are still up there. They would've had to have been there for millions of years. That's not possible because they would've decayed, or eroded away, but didn't.

[pilgrimpater]

@ironman197268 Yes indeed there is sea life up there, as in many mountains where sea beds have been forced up, but why are you assuming such an incredible erosion rate? There is definately erosion but not due to the great erosional forces of glaciers and water. The erosion is largely due to wind (and possibly frost) which is an exctionally slow erosional force. In fact i would go so far as to say that the rising due to plate activity contributes to exposure of fossils.

[pilgrimpater]

@ironman197268 "Another interesting thing is those oysters and clams are petrified in the CLOSED position."

All of them closed. Being in a closed position is not unusual just because they are opened when you go to the restaurant.

"Sounds like they got buried, killed, petrified and uncovered in a hurry."

Sounds the exactly the opposite. Fossils require fairly quick covering but the fossilisation process is very slow else Creationist "scientists" would demonstrate otherwise. They don't of course.

[ironman197268]

@pilgrimpater Seriously man, there is oysters and clams up there, that are the size of 500lb boulders. 3000 feet from the top of Mt. Everest. That would put that land area, during uplift, in the time range of about 50 million years ago. So... 3000 feet from the top of Mt. Everest has been eroding for at least 50 million years. Why are all those petrified giant oysters and clams still there?