We climbed to the peak of Manzano Mountains in New Mexico - approx 10,000 to 11,000 feet, and found shell and coral fossils. How did they get there? How were the mountains formed? Upheaval? Volcanic? Was there sea life millions of years ago when earth was covered with water, and was the sea level above 11,000 feet? Gosh, I am a dope when it comes to geology. Don't laugh, please.
2007-11-04 02:42:40 · 7 answers · asked by ava 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Earth Sciences & Geology
colllision plate margins. the is evidence for Alfred Wegener explaination of continental drift which played a major role in his arguement. when two continental plates colide the oceanic crust between them is forced upwards (hence all the fossils are also which are contained in sediment) to form fold mountains. e.g. himalayas.
more info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continental_drift
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Wegener
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geology_of_the_Himalaya
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_boundaries
2007-11-04 02:53:35 · answer #1 · answered by Nick 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Those mountains were once part of a flat sea floor. Later, the sea floor was pushed up to form the mountains. Earthquakes are part of the same process.
The Manzanos are fairly young mountains, having been uplifted in the last 10 million years as part of the formation of the Rio Grande Rift. The fossils you saw in that particular area were most likely from a sea floor during the Pennsylvanian period, which was 299 to 325 million years ago. That's when most of the coal in the Eastern half of the USA formed, and that coal would have been formed along the coastline of the uplifted seabeds you saw in the mountains.
The Earth has never been covered with water a great deal more than it is today, it's just that some different areas have been covered at different times.
2007-11-04 02:48:01 · answer #2 · answered by Now and Then Comes a Thought 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
No, the shell fossils did not climb on top of the mountain range but the sea receded or the shore line went down and the land rose up. The shells were deposited along with the sediments at the site of sea (basin) for million of years and were transformed into fossils while the sediments changed into rocks during "mountain building process" or orogeny.
Where you see mountains ranges today, sea existed tens and hundreds of million years ago and the present sea sites are the embryonic or nascent mountains in the process of forming.
When the land rises the shore line relatively recedes away tens or hundreds of km away.
thnks
2007-11-04 03:49:12 · answer #3 · answered by mandira_nk 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
At that altitude, it would almost have to have been upheaval.
That makes sense - the rockies are the result of two tectonic plates crashing together, and buckling one of them. So it's likely that where the Manzano Mountains are used to be a lake or sea, and then geology happened and forced the earth to buckle upwards.
2007-11-04 02:46:20 · answer #4 · answered by Brian L 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
because of fact we are reaching for any clinical evidence we are able to get. in spite of the undeniable fact that it does look a sprint bit a stretch to declare marine fossils = flood that covers the finished earth. Whoever suggested that did no longer even attempt to discover the different clarification. Plus the water receded promptly pointing out that no longer a lot of marine existence could have died in this style of short term. Now in case you discovered a huge boat on some insanely extreme mountain i think of that would desire to be slightly greater conclusive nonetheless no longer completely so.
2017-01-04 21:27:59 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
its probabaly because that place used to be a lake a sea or a river. and as the contenents move(plate tectonics)it was changed. when two plates meet they push each other and it causes the land betwen them rise creating mountains
2007-11-04 08:21:51 · answer #6 · answered by d. b 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The shells were buried and then the sediment/rock raised up.
But note this did not necessarily take place millions of years ago - that is a philosophical view not a scientific one.
The fact that the earth is covered by sedimentary rock containing billions of dead creatures is good evidence of the Global Flood. After all you do not fossilise even a small shellfish by burying it a millimetre at a time. The fact that fossils exist is evidence of rapid burial.
http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/373
2007-11-04 06:55:29 · answer #7 · answered by a Real Truthseeker 7 · 0⤊ 6⤋