What conclusion can be drawn from Jessie's discovery of rock imprints?

Jessie's discovery of rock imprints suggests that the area known as Rock Hill was once submerged underwater. This conclusion is supported by the presence of imprints, such as those of shells or marine organisms, which typically indicate a historical marine environment. When rocks contain such imprints, it often implies that they were formed in conditions conducive to the preservation of these marks, like being under water. This is consistent with the geological processes that can leave behind evidence of past environments, reinforcing the notion that the area was once part of an aquatic ecosystem.

The other options do not align with the implications of the discovery. The idea that rocks do not change over time contradicts fundamental geological principles, which show that rocks are subject to various processes including erosion and sedimentation. The notion that imprints indicate erosion does not accurately represent the context provided by the discovery; imprints are more indicative of the presence of organisms rather than the erosion of rocks. Lastly, the claim that shells only form in dry areas is factually incorrect as shells typically originate from organisms living in marine environments. Thus, option B stands out as the most logical conclusion based on the evidence presented by the rock imprints.