Want this question answered?
The fossils found at the top of a canyon will probably be younger than those at the of the bottom of the canyon because the fossils at the bottom of the canyon would have been there earlier when the so called "canyon" was once a flat land, so as time went by, the flat land began growing and getting taller and finally became a canyon so the fossils at the top of the canyon WOULD be younger than those at the bottom because the bottom fossils were there before the top of the canton even existed.
I don't now you
Archaeologist Darwin has found a suspicious fossil at the Grand Canyon.
If the rocks containing the fossils have been involved in a mountain building episode they would be folded and if some of the folds were laid in a recumbent position and later eroded you would have older above younger rocks. Of course, it would be easy to find out if this was the case because of the various sedimentary structures in each separate layer of rock.
The fossil on the bottom would be older because as time goes on rock builds up and buries fossils so the higher it is the more recent it is.
You would know because the youngest rock layer is always on the top, and the oldest is always at the bottom of the canyon.
Is at the bottom of course! Since sedimentary rock is formed when layers build up and then harden. So the younger would be at the top.!
It would be found in the lower layers, rather that younger fossils which are found in the upper layers. ♥
The youngest rocks would be igneous, those created by cooling magma. Impossible to find a fossil there.
The Grand Canyon is very like a 'V' in shape. Although, at the bottom, there is a river bed which would cause it to look more of a squared 'U' >>> \_/ Would look similar.
The sides of the canyon would always be crumbling into it, but as that would mean it was getting wider, it wouldn't fill up, just get more level. But presumably there's a stream/river at the bottom which caused the canyon in the first place and this is likely to continue the erosion.
not really, i don't think so.