Very interesting as I watch this a year later. I always sort of wondered why the Tetons were such a short range, as far as N-S distance goes, yet so high and dramatic. And why they seem to so abruptly end just before Yellowstone. That 30 or 40% of the range got devoured by the YHS seems to make intuitive sense in light of these data and this study. Someone asked where all the material from the old northern end of the Tetons went--did it go to the Snake River Plain, for example? I have always figured that it was melted into the Yellowstone cauldron down in or near the mantle and didn't go anywhere. Is that what most folks think? It was mentioned that because the basement rocks of the Tetons and rhyolites of Yellowstone have essentially the same chemistry, it would be hard to tell one from the other--if I understood the answer. Question: Didn't the YHS also destroy the southern ends of the Lemhi and Lost River Ranges--and probably others--as it buzzsawed its way through Southern Idaho. Some think that those ranges, among others, ran south all the way to existing ranges in Nevada and Utah in the Basin and Range, pre Yellowstone hot spot. Anyway, if so, I don't believe the Southern Lemhis or Lost Rivers are made of the same rock as the Tetons, or at least not all of them--there's a lot of limestones in parts of the Lemhis and Lost Rivers for example, along with slates and preCambiran Belt quartzites--a variety of stuff--but I never hear "granite" mentioned among them. So, if there was anything to find of those southern ranges now missing, would we be able to find evidence anywhere? Difficult I know, as much of the Snake River plain is now covered with much newer basalts from the much more recent rifting fizzures such as Craters of the Moon. But still, I have always wondered whether you could find chuncks of those old mountain ranges embedded in the rhyolites of the older YSP exposures in Idaho. The fact that I have never heard of such a thing, at least yet, suggests to me that the YHS must melt and swallow everything that passes over it into its deep hot cauldron, never to be seen again, at lest in prior form. Another question, or point I am always confused about. What is the relationship, if any, between the "migrating" YHS and Basin and Range extension? Did the B & R extension start before the arrival of the YHS? Or has the eastern boundary of the Basin and Range (i.e. the Tetons and the Wasatch today) always been just south of the YHS? Or is it a mere coincidence that the eastern edge of the Basin and Range and its fault systems going to Southern Utah happen to lie at the same longitude today as the YHS, but haven't in the past and won't in the future? I have assumed that the movement of the YHS is the same speed as that which the North American plate slides west, and that the Great basin expansion is driven by the rifting of the Baja Peninsula away from North American continent, continuing into California and Nevada, whatever speed that is, which means the processes are independent of each other. But are they? I am not a geologist but have read what I can, and what I can digest, for many years now, and this question keeps coming up in my head. Thank you for making these excellent presentations available to us thousands of miles away. I live in Puerto Vallarta Mexico now, at the base of the Sierra Madre del Sur batholith (which I wish I could find any videos or books about, geologically). But I spent part of my youth in the western shadow of the Tetons, on a farm I now learn was part of the Heise caldera of Old Yellowstone. Not many places on earth more breathtaking than the Tetons. Too bad if we lost half of them to Yellowstone's passing!
I'm pretty certain the "Bonneville flood" neither started from, nor was caused by Lake Bonneville, a puddle left by the "flood" you see signs of, that came from the east, not the south or the west.
With the vast diversity of life over the past hundreds of millions of years on Earth and the difficulty they encountered, I would bet anything that we are indeed aliens ourselves. Or rather that life almost certainly exists elsewhere in the universe.
Sedimentary rocks mostly form underwater. Many of them incorporate naked eye visible sea creatures as they form (limestone). The retrospective landmass arrangements the geologists display (like Pangea here) are predominantly put together based on rocks formed in the coastal and Continental shelf seas, and the fossilized sea creatures left in them.
I thought everyone knew by now the Permian extinction was primarily from volcanism but the big driver were the buried coal beds being ignited provding fuel to last for so many years. It took about 5 million years to begin a recovery and it was the largest explosion of life since the carboniforius
I doubt you would even recognize Earth of ONE million years ago, much less the planet almost 250 times older! You guys always start out with "maps" that show the Earth of today (screwed around, but still in the modern shapes). I suspect Earth was flatter, with far less water (less than ten percent as much).
@@rogeriopenna9014 It was yesterday, in terms of planet Earth's life (the last 5%), on a planet continuing to evolve in its middle age. The Boxer "carries the reminders, Of ev'ry glove that laid him down, Or cut him till he cried out, In his anger and his shame, 'I am leaving, I am leaving'"
James, you are a total badass! What a great trip! 8 years of prep, wow! I am impressed and happy for you. Great presentation, very informative. Awesome! 🙂
Mr. Mauch, Thank you for this excellent lecture about your adventure through the Grand Canyon. I so enjoyed your hiking experience and the geology lesson! The hiking is something I’ll never do but loved the chance to see your trip and all of the historical geology. Well done Sir!
What a wonderful presentation of such a tantalizing and intriguing landscape and geologic history. You mention, almost in passing, that you felt the urge to climb up tothe top of Vulcan's Throne. That's hard to do even from the bottom of the cone--at the RIM of the canyon. To climb the infamous Lava Falls route, and then to ascend to the top of Vulcan's Throne requires a level of physical fitness and perspicacity that is unbelievable. I would imagine you're one of a VERY small number of people who have climbed the Lava Falls Route and then descended it--in that order, as most people likely start from the top.
Interesting. I "boated" off the coast of NF in the 80s drilling on a semi submersible a couple hundred Km east. Loved the country, but not an igneous/metamorphic fan. Still, I was interested in that geology (I'm a geologist). Not much of that in your talk but impressive pics.
I'd like to ask one question: Why do you (geologists) assume Earth was always the way it is today? Continents, oceans, mountains, rivers, and other details show signs of radical change, in widely separated locations, and often, repeatedly. Assuming facts not in evidence is not science. Earth of only 10,000 years ago looked very different, and Earth of one million years ago would be unrecognizable to humans of today! "Heraclitus, I believe, says that all things pass and nothing stays, and comparing existing things to the flow of a river. He says you could not step twice into the same river.” - Plato" Earth, it's environment and topography, are part of the River of Time, the ever-changing instant of "Now!" that carries us all along. It is illogical to believe the planet, with its undeniable scars, would be immune to the vicissitudes of change over time. It's been cruising around a violent galaxy for four-point-five-billion years. There is no way it escaped untouched, and the landscape testifies to that.
Brilliant man , fascinating presentation . There is so much happening , with so much unfathomable time involved. Our lives are only a quick little snapshot.
As an early visitor to Jackson Hole (circa 1957), I've seen enough changes around the American West, to know there is a lot of misinformation in this video. The Tetons were NOT pushed up "millions of years ago", geologists' favorite dating term, but far more recently. The soils distribution was caused by a massive "flood" that swept across the West, from the "river" that flowed from the Arctic to the mid-Atlantic. It rebounded, as water does (pick up a claw-foot bathtub, some time, to see this in action), and carried the same sediments back and forth, scattering them far and wide.
I would recommend “The Man Who Walked Through Time,” by Colín Fletcher. Your hike was more ambitious than his, but you might find it entertaining. As he was preparing for his hike, he talked to many people, many of whom said that he should talk to Dr. Harvey Butchart. I actually took a class in Real Analysis from him, but never hiked with him. The longest hike I have taken was Bass to Tanner on the Tonto.
If you would look out the window, at those sharp peaks that made Jackson Hole famous, if you would say those mountains are "millions of years old" (much less "billions"), I'd say you don't know much about Planet Earth. Starting with its famous "reducing atmosphere". Plate tectonics do NOT explain the mega-ranges, the Andes, Himalayas, Rockies/Sierra Madres, Sierra Nevadas, et al. Those ranges were pushed up by other means, and in doing so, the Grand Canyon came to be. The "Great Unconformity" was probably a mystery to Charlie Brown but a few looks around, and one notices great upheaval, twisted rocks, and more than enough signs of something driving a very large chunk of old crust (ONAC), into the fractured craton holding the Colorado Plateau, pinned against the "accretionary plate" running from Siberia to Guatemala. An inland sea lay on top of much of the region, and a waterway traveled from the Arctic Ocean, to the mid-Atlantic region, where the Gulf of Mexico now sits (it had been on the other side of the ocean, off Africa). Something MORE than mere plate tectonics was at work, and not that long ago, because NONE of the great ranges of Earth SHOW "millions of years" of weathering, much less "billions"! There is a very different story that explains all of this, without the caveats, oopsi-doodles, and the "Great Unconformity" to poke a plot hole big enough for a semi truck to drive through! The ROCKS are old, made back when Earth was in the rock production phase. Their current location, appearance, and conditions, are far more modern than these OLD theories allow for. I bet there isn't a geologist alive who would recognize Earth of only ONE million years ago, instead of the plural version they insist on.
Wow!!!!,,It so amazing the depth science goes to prove ( only thing ) is that they refuse to believe in GOD- As Supreme creator of life itself. No big words nor math can explain it!!! Its really sad to listen to this,,,I cant imagine any human with a brain would actually believe this nonsense. I just watched this to here it from your point of view. This is very sad,,My imagination could come up with a more convention,,,other than God,,why you all came up with this just proves God as Supreme creater.sad science spends wasted money,peoples life dedicated to these [ theories ] no facts,not one???👀👀🤔😢😢😢😢. I gave you my full attention to hear you out.😢 ok I give you this,,,Beer gets warm,coffee gets cold. I agree.😂
the world gets struck by meteorites more frequently than folks want to admit hahahahahaha and these time scales are meaningless at the geologic scale, we are not even a going concern
The nucleus of NA (Laurentia) is the Superior craton. Wyoming is merely a southwest add-on. Sir, are you supposed to be a geologist? If it's that so you've got to throw out your ugly biases! I'm really not impressed!
A great adventure and amazing experience where geology is seen as it is and as it shaped culture... and then this is where geology is so "exposed"... as if we were out in Arizona or Nevada... and.. I remember the 70s... it was OUR time... So many of us wanted to do something interesting, different... breaking the paradigm... You did just that... Bravo
