Astounding Geological (?) Discovery In Utah: Megacube Formations Video

[Ermintruder]

Please watch this unforgettable video, of some of the most amazing stone formations you have ever seen. You will not be disappointed!

If this is natural, why is it not more commonly referenced and studied? If it is artificial, then my previous comments apply: but even more so.

This is a breathtaking cinematic glide above (and intimate clamber upon) perhaps the most weird chunks of stone anywhere in the world.

I really welcome everyone's opinion about (and interpretation of) what we're seeing here.

ETA the intrepid young explorer cannot seem to properly talk in terms of units of volume, confusing them with area. But he is forgiven...and must be thanked

 

[Min Bannister]

It is very well studied. There are many books and websites talking about the crystalline structure of rocks and minerals. Here is one of them.

https://www.geologyin.com/2014/11/crystal-structure-and-crystal-system.html

It is the same principle as, say the Giant's Causeway only square. It is still very beautiful and cool though.

 

[Min Bannister]

We have a thread with a few other examples too.

https://forums.forteana.org/index.p...ures-that-appear-man-made.67444/#post-1981807

 

[Sid]

Please watch this unforgettable video, of some of the most amazing stone formations you have ever seen. You will not be disappointed!

If this is natural, why is it not more commonly referenced and studied? If it is artificial, then my previous comments apply: but even more so.

This is a breathtaking cinematic glide above (and intimate clamber upon) perhaps the most weird chunks of stone anywhere in the world.

I really welcome everyone's opinion about (and interpretation of) what we're seeing here.

ETA the intrepid young explorer cannot seem to properly talk in terms of units of volume, confusing them with area. But he is forgiven...and must be thanked

That certainly does seem to be layers upon layers of ancient sea-beds, hence the fossilized coral. Interesting views of those petroglyphs ~ like your dog too! I suppose it stands to reason that a certain weight of certain types of rock will respond to break away in a square form when it becomes weaker as time (and natural forces) go by.

 

[Analogue Boy]

Minecraft!

 

[Ermintruder]

It is very well studied

Apologies, I meant the location seems under-promoted (according to the video author: I suppose he may be wrong about that, but I got the impression he was semi-local) rather than any generative geological process.

He does distinguish clearly between the physical instances of the cubes, and the prehistoric indigenous markings visible on some of them.

I'm unsure if the author also seems to be thinking that some of these blocks have also been worked/cut, in addition to any other originating mechanisms: I need to watch the video again.

It is the same principle as, say the Giant's Causeway only square

I've climbed over that amazing geology in person (similarly, at Fingal's Cave) , but what I have real problems understanding is how the scale is so massive for these Utah cubes. I will read the references you've linked to, and ideally obtain an understanding as to how this can happen, but it seems so counter-intuitively...huge

 

[Min Bannister]

Apologies, I meant the location seems under-promoted

I should have realised that's what you meant.

I'm unsure if the author also seems to be thinking that some of these blocks have also been worked/cut, in addition to any other originating mechanisms: I need to watch the video again.

I'm afraid I found him annoying so stopped watching after 6 minutes! I mean, he was even wearing barefoot shoes. (I have some but that's different..) The petroglyphs were really cool though.

I've climbed over that amazing geology in person (similarly, at Fingal's Cave) , but what I have real problems understanding is how the scale is so massive for these Utah cubes

Everything is bigger in America!

 

[Steven]

(I have some but that's different..)

 

[James_H]

What a beautiful place! I don't buy that it's mysterious but I think it's cool of him to go from seeing it on the map to actually going there and investigating/documenting it in person.

 

[Sharon Hill]

As a geologist, this is really frustrating to watch. He is encountering some interesting geological features, for sure, but he acts like he's discovered something mysterious and "intelligently designed". I see features that are well known and very unmysterious in this video.

The blocks weather via jointing. This is a fundamental geologic concept. So you can tell he's never had any exposure to that. Jointing can create this look of block pavement. The video is also showing examples of physical weathering, and preferential erosion of layers. As a result, you get an example of a "balanced" rock that looks impressive. You also see some taffoni weathering (swiss cheese rock). I'm not sure about the "bubble rock" but that's not mysterious - could be coral, could be some chemical deposition, could be oolites.

There is no excuse not doing any basic research here. The "performance" on these videos really makes me cringe. (There are thousands of similar ones on all platforms.) There are so few places in the world where people have not already been. Yet, the presenters act like discoverers instead of visitors. I suppose they really wish to find enchantment in the world and to feel special about it. But ignorance of earth processes (biological, geological, physical, atmospheric, etc.) lead people to think they are "created" or supernatural, which is just sad. There is great beauty in actually finding out how nature works.

It would have been 100x better if it had been a geologist explaining what we already know about these magnificent formations.

Anyway, this certainly qualifies as several topics on my list to cover via Spooky Geology that I haven't gotten to yet.

 

[Aydee_Aitchdee]

There is no excuse not doing any basic research here. The "performance" on these videos really makes me cringe. (There are thousands of similar ones on all platforms.) There are so few places in the world where people have not already been. Yet, the presenters act like discoverers instead of visitors. I suppose they really wish to find enchantment in the world and to feel special about it. But ignorance of earth processes (biological, geological, physical, atmospheric, etc.) lead people to think they are "created" or supernatural, which is just sad. There is great beauty in actually finding out how nature works.

There is an excuse, it's "maybe I'll go viral!"
I didn't say it was a good excuse.

I also hear it said on any number of tv shows that "straight lines can't occur in nature" and it obviously does. I rank this trope up there with having to wait 24 hours to report someone missing.

 

[Sharon Hill]

There is an excuse, it's "maybe I'll go viral!"
I didn't say it was a good excuse.

I also hear it said on any number of tv shows that "straight lines can't occur in nature" and it obviously does. I rank this trope up there with having to wait 24 hours to report someone missing.

Also tracks from the exaggerated language used in the promotion - example: him saying it's a "perfect" cube and then actually measuring it to show it's not even near perfect, but you didn't have to measure to see that. I wasn't going to comment on his motive, but I agree. This kind of media really grates on me because of the line of credulous sheep that just gasp at it without pause. At least the comments do have a few good points.

 

[kesavaross]

I'm just curious as to how those cubes were formed.

 

[Sharon Hill]

I'm just curious as to how those cubes were formed.

Joints formed at 90 angles.
Example of research https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674775520301268

 

[kesavaross]

Joints formed at 90 angles.
Example of research https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674775520301268

Thanks for that. That's going to be some serious reading for me while holding a dictionary.

 

[Sid]

There is an excuse, it's "maybe I'll go viral!"
I didn't say it was a good excuse.

I also hear it said on any number of tv shows that "straight lines can't occur in nature" and it obviously does. I rank this trope up there with having to wait 24 hours to report someone missing.

Straight breaks/fractures - not sure about 'straight lines in nature' because I haven't personally come across any as such myself. Though examples would be good though - maybe the ones I viewed at Stonehenge would fit into that category, thought to be cut into the ground by some unusual(?) means.

 

[Sid]

As a geologist, this is really frustrating to watch. He is encountering some interesting geological features, for sure, but he acts like he's discovered something mysterious and "intelligently designed". I see features that are well known and very unmysterious in this video.

The blocks weather via jointing. This is a fundamental geologic concept. So you can tell he's never had any exposure to that. Jointing can create this look of block pavement. The video is also showing examples of physical weathering, and preferential erosion of layers. As a result, you get an example of a "balanced" rock that looks impressive. You also see some taffoni weathering (swiss cheese rock). I'm not sure about the "bubble rock" but that's not mysterious - could be coral, could be some chemical deposition, could be oolites.

There is no excuse not doing any basic research here. The "performance" on these videos really makes me cringe. (There are thousands of similar ones on all platforms.) There are so few places in the world where people have not already been. Yet, the presenters act like discoverers instead of visitors. I suppose they really wish to find enchantment in the world and to feel special about it. But ignorance of earth processes (biological, geological, physical, atmospheric, etc.) lead people to think they are "created" or supernatural, which is just sad. There is great beauty in actually finding out how nature works.

It would have been 100x better if it had been a geologist explaining what we already know about these magnificent formations.

Anyway, this certainly qualifies as several topics on my list to cover via Spooky Geology that I haven't gotten to yet.

I find it interesting that the actual blocks themselves show a vertical dark strata in them - the rock must have been tilted from horizontal to a vertical a long time ago through natural forces I assume?

 

[SimonBurchell]

What an amazing place. Fortunately he doesn't talk too much during the video (I'm glad he clarified about three-dimensional cubes, as opposed to the two- or seven-dimensional variety). I didn't notice him making any extraordinary claims, that is great geology, and a nice dog! I would love to explore that.

 

[Sharon Hill]

Thanks for that. That's going to be some serious reading for me while holding a dictionary.

Yeah, sorry. It's really not meant for reading.

 

[Sharon Hill]

I find it interesting that the actual blocks themselves show a vertical dark strata in them - the rock must have been tilted from horizontal to a vertical a long time ago through natural forces I assume?

Exposed surfaces get what's called "desert varnish", perhaps that's what you are seeing. Joints will have erosion surfaces because they are exposed. But this area has been geologically uplifted. The geology is... a lot. Lots of layers, sedimentation, erosion, some volcanics, tectonics, hundreds of millions of years of stuff going on.

 

[Ermintruder]

The geology is... a lot.

I need to extract a timestamp reference from the video, but I was very intrigued by his passing comments about the blocks perhaps having been worked upon by hand (in addition to the astounding fundamental generative processes). I think he talks about 'spoil' from the rock face (and potentially toolmarks) at one point where he is down inside an incredibly-tight crevice, unless this is just sheer over-interpretation on his part (maybe encouraged by the prehistoric markings?).

I know that the young man's style (and some of his comments) can grate to an extent, but the overriding feeling I get from his video is gratitude, in that I'm so glad he produced it (and that Youtube's mystical algorithms proffered it up to me).

I am so impressed by the location (as will be the majority of other viewers) but I do entirely agree @Sharon Hill that he should try to avoid giving the impression that he is the first human discoverer of this geology (I'm not convinced that's a deliberate attempt on his part: but there's an implicit impression this is so).

@Sharon Hill - could you please attempt to summarise for non-geologists how the sheer seperated scale of the quasi-regular fissures/splits (in three orthogonal axes) fundamentally takes place? I will try reading your cited-but-not-recommended technical reference, and I believe I have some inexact subjective appreciation of the substantial list of sequential geoformative processes you've listed (also @Min Bannister thanks for that earlier reference too)

Whilst I can try to rationalise the macro recapitulating the micro (and analogize these rock blocks as being massive upscaled siblings of individual salt crystals or possibly quartz/other crystalline minerals) I get the impression that molecular /ionic stereochemical processes at the just-supraparticle scale generate the tiny-to-medium baby cubes we're personally familiar with. These rockblocks are just....something else: for size. And that's even when I think of humans being the size of fleas or microbes at a relative geotechnic level.

I do know that solute (whether accreting from aqueous or magma fluids) can exfiltrate absolutely massive crystals (I believe I've seen pictures of underground caverns, bedecked with gems tens of metres in their long axis) but there is a... lack of modular isometry about them (?).

TLDR- how can these giant blocks be so damn big yet fracture so damn similar in size/shape?

ps I love your blog

 

[blessmycottonsocks]

Joints formed at 90 angles.
Example of research https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674775520301268

Presumably such a process could also account for the rectilinear stratigraphy of the Yonaguni "monument"?

 

[Sharon Hill]

I need to extract a timestamp reference from the video, but I was very intrigued by his passing comments about the blocks perhaps having been worked upon by hand (in addition to the astounding fundamental generative processes). I think he talks about 'spoil' from the rock face (and potentially toolmarks) at one point where he is down inside an incredibly-tight crevice, unless this is just sheer over-interpretation on his part (maybe encouraged by the prehistoric markings?).

I know that the young man's style (and some of his comments) can grate to an extent, but the overriding feeling I get from his video is gratitude, in that I'm so glad he produced it (and that Youtube's mystical algorithms proffered it up to me).

I am so impressed by the location (as will be the majority of other viewers) but I do entirely agree @Sharon Hill that he should try to avoid giving the impression that he is the first human discoverer of this geology (I'm not convinced that's a deliberate attempt on his part: but there's an implicit impression this is so).

@Sharon Hill - could you please attempt to summarise for non-geologists how the sheer seperated scale of the quasi-regular fissures/splits (in three orthogonal axes) fundamentally takes place? I will try reading your cited-but-not-recommended technical reference, and I believe I have some inexact subjective appreciation of the substantial list of sequential geoformative processes you've listed (also @Min Bannister thanks for that earlier reference too)

Whilst I can try to rationalise the macro recapitulating the micro (and analogize these rock blocks as being massive upscaled siblings of individual salt crystals or possibly quartz/other crystalline minerals) I get the impression that molecular /ionic stereochemical processes at the just-supraparticle scale generate the tiny-to-medium baby cubes we're personally familiar with. These rockblocks are just....something else: for size. And that's even when I think of humans being the size of fleas or microbes at a relative geotechnic level.

I do know that solute (whether accreting from aqueous or magma fluids) can exfiltrate absolutely massive crystals (I believe I've seen pictures of underground caverns, bedecked with gems tens of metres in their long axis) but there is a... lack of modular isometry about them (?).

TLDR- how can these giant blocks be so damn big yet fracture so damn similar in size/shape?

ps I love your blog

It's very common for people to assert that orthogonal jointing (at ~90 deg angles) is created or designed. It's not uncommon, though. There are many types of jointing and some of it really freaks people out (columnar and exfoliation, for example, can be extraordinary to see).

All rock bodies are subject to stresses. Joints are an expression of tensile stress and the characteristics of the rock - where they will break along weak points. Even though orthogonal joint sets are very common, the reason they form this way is still not entirely well-explained. Jointing is a complex topic in structural geology. I looked and was not able to find a good video on it. Most of them are professors giving lectures, which are rather unpleasant to watch. But check out the wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_(geology) to see some examples.

There are many observations in nature we can't entirely explain. But that doesn't mean they are unexplainable. It's just going to take more work.

 

[Sharon Hill]

Just to note, this is a known place called Muley Point East. There are roads to it. Lots of people go there.