<p>Jeffrey Ralh of Yale and coauthors published <a href="http://geology.gsapubs.org/content/31/9/761.short">Combined single-grain (U-Th)/He and U/Pb dating of detrital zircons from the Navajo Sandstone, Utah</a>, which concludes that Navajo sandstone originated from the Appalachian Mountains.  A review of the article is found here: <a href="http://www.geotimes.org/nov03/NN_navajo.html">http://www.geotimes.org/nov03/NN_navajo.html</a>.</p>

<p>Rahl et al. propsed that a large river system transported the sediment.  </p>

<p>However, Ralh's research concerned only Navajo sandstone, not Coconino sandstone as far as I know.  </p>

<p><a href="http://www.ees.lehigh.edu/ftp/retreat/outgoing/for_team_appalachians/appalachians_paper/dickinson_gerhrels_2003_sedimentary_geology_zircons.pdf">U–Pb ages of detrital zircons from Permian and Jurassic eolian sandstones of the Colorado Plateau, USA: paleogeographic implications</a> does investigate Coconino Sandstone and other sandstones from the region and discusses what fraction are of Appalachian origin and transport mechanisms. </p>

<p>34% of Coconino Sandstone zircon grains are reported to be of Appalachian origin in table 4.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-06-27T20:22:07.533Z
The [Navajo Sandstone](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navajo_Sandstone) was formed from a massive region of sand dunes ([erg](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erg_(landform))).  It may be difficult to piece together all the stages of the sand's transport from its parent rock.
Spencer
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-06-27T20:31:53.487Z
Also, the link to your second article is broken.
Spencer
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-05-28T13:18:52.287Z
2014-05-29T14:56:35.777Z
2014-05-29T14:56:35.777Z
DavePhD
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_Museum" rel="noreferrer">The Creation Museum</a> is a terrifying place for scientists of all stripes. One of their exhibits is the "Flood Geology" exhibit, which purports to explain how a flood of (literally) Biblical proportions circa 6000 years ago explains all the features of the Earth we see today. One panel at that exhibit is titled "Evidences of the Flood in the Grand Canyon":</p>

<p><a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/scalzi/1969202697/sizes/o/" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/xcEdml.jpg" alt="enter image description here"></a><br>
<sup>(photo taken by John Scalzi; click for larger, more-readable version - if you think you can handle it)</sup></p>

<p>This is obviously boneheaded in so, so many ways, but anyway - this panel makes the following claim:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Sand grains in the Coconino Sandstone come from the Appalachian Mountains.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Three related questions:</p>

<ol>
<li>Is this claim true? (The Creation Museum is not beyond telling outright lies, so I have to ask...)</li>
<li>If so, how did it get there?</li>
<li>How do we determine that a particular grain of sand originates in the Appalachians? </li>
</ol>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-05-27T13:46:19.853Z
We have the "Creation Evidences Museum" in Glen Rose TX - why do they have so much trouble with the uncountable noun "evidence"?
winwaed
<geology><sedimentology>
Is it true that "[sand] grains in the Coconino Sandstone come from the Appalachian Mountains"?
senshin
# Is it true that "[sand] grains in the Coconino Sandstone come from the Appalachian Mountains"?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2014-05-27)

[The Creation Museum](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_Museum) is a terrifying place for scientists of all stripes. One of their exhibits is the "Flood Geology" exhibit, which purports to explain how a flood of (literally) Biblical proportions circa 6000 years ago explains all the features of the Earth we see today. One panel at that exhibit is titled "Evidences of the Flood in the Grand Canyon":

[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/xcEdml.jpg)](https://www.flickr.com/photos/scalzi/1969202697/sizes/o/)  
(photo taken by John Scalzi; click for larger, more-readable version - if you think you can handle it)

This is obviously boneheaded in so, so many ways, but anyway - this panel makes the following claim:

> Sand grains in the Coconino Sandstone come from the Appalachian Mountains.

Three related questions:

1. Is this claim true? (The Creation Museum is not beyond telling outright lies, so I have to ask...)
2. If so, how did it get there?
3. How do we determine that a particular grain of sand originates in the Appalachians?

**Tags:** geology, sedimentology

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: We have the "Creation Evidences Museum" in Glen Rose TX - why do they have so much trouble with the uncountable noun "evidence"?  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2014-05-28. Score: 14 | Accepted answer

Jeffrey Ralh of Yale and coauthors published [Combined single-grain (U-Th)/He and U/Pb dating of detrital zircons from the Navajo Sandstone, Utah](http://geology.gsapubs.org/content/31/9/761.short), which concludes that Navajo sandstone originated from the Appalachian Mountains. A review of the article is found here: <http://www.geotimes.org/nov03/NN_navajo.html>.

Rahl et al. propsed that a large river system transported the sediment.

However, Ralh's research concerned only Navajo sandstone, not Coconino sandstone as far as I know.

[U–Pb ages of detrital zircons from Permian and Jurassic eolian sandstones of the Colorado Plateau, USA: paleogeographic implications](http://www.ees.lehigh.edu/ftp/retreat/outgoing/for_team_appalachians/appalachians_paper/dickinson_gerhrels_2003_sedimentary_geology_zircons.pdf) does investigate Coconino Sandstone and other sandstones from the region and discusses what fraction are of Appalachian origin and transport mechanisms.

34% of Coconino Sandstone zircon grains are reported to be of Appalachian origin in table 4.

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: The [Navajo Sandstone](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navajo_Sandstone) was formed from a massive region of sand dunes ([erg](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erg_(landform))).  It may be difficult to piece together all the stages of the sand's transport from its parent rock.  
> **username_3**: Also, the link to your second article is broken.  

---

