Just got back from the Grand Canyon and the way people talk about the rock layers is totally wrong

I was at the South Rim last week, and every tour guide and sign just calls it 'the red rock' or 'the Kaibab limestone'. That's it. But standing there, you can see at least a dozen distinct bands, each with a different texture and color. The Coconino sandstone isn't just white, it's got these wild cross-bedded patterns from ancient sand dunes. The Bright Angel Shale is this greenish mudstone that crumbles if you touch it. Everyone focuses on how old it is, but they miss how you can read the whole environmental history from a desert to a sea just by looking at the stack. It's not one big hole, it's a library. Has anyone else felt like the basic tourist info strips all the cool detail out of the story?

2 comments

2 Comments

lily_craig16d ago

Totally get that. My main takeaway from the Grand Canyon was mostly about how bad I am at taking panoramic photos. The rocks were nice too, I guess.

wadefoster16d ago

Honestly, the cross-bedding in the Coconino is the best part, shows the wind direction from like 275 million years ago.