Posted on 10/30/2013 4:56:18 PM PDT by lasereye
Theories about the formation of the Grand Canyon keep changing too. When I was in elementary school I was told that it was carved out very slowly over millions of years. This was presented as established fact. Now there’s no agreement. One theory holds that a big flood breaking through from a large lake carved it out.
>>One thing that demonstrates is how many “scientific” theories are nothing more than factually unsupported speculation, which are often presented as “fact”. This is especially true with theories about origins/evolution.<<
Brush up on what a Scientific Theory is. It is not a “guess write large.”
A Scientific Theory is the highest level of thought in science. It is from whence axioms are born. It is constructed from facts.
Of course.
>>I approve of the scientific method. One key element of it is that a scientific theory must be falsifiable.<<
And TToE is.
>>Theories about the formation of the Grand Canyon keep changing too. When I was in elementary school I was told that it was carved out very slowly over millions of years. This was presented as established fact. Now there’s no agreement. One theory holds that a big flood breaking through from a large lake carved it out.<<
I have not heard that, but it would not matter. It puts not a dent (and may clarify) the overall theory of how the Earth was formed (geology), continental drift, etc. etc.
But if you could kindly post the link to the scientific article/journal where this “Big flood” concept is described I would be interested in reading it.
-PJ
Lol. Has whoever wrote this never heard about gravity? It is a property of all matter... it shouldn't be such a mystery that its action should be characterized as "somehow."
And its snap your finger time again!!!!!!!
The impact theory fails, but not because of this. Thanks bhf. Only capture works, it doesn’t matter how “rare” it is.
Grand Canyon Gorge Is 9 Times Older Than Thought
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1999143/posts
Obi-Wan: That’s no moon. It’s a space station.
Apparently they do a lot of research on making conservatives and religious people live up to their ignorant stereotypes.
Knowing the answers before the question is even asked does mean that all that messy and expensive investigation stuff can be avoided.
>>Grand Canyon Gorge Is 9 Times Older Than Thought<<
Like Cher.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/50250163/#.UoEI7vnrzP0
As this article shows, scientists these days cannot come to any agreement about how the Grand Canyon formed. However the average person is under the erroneous impression that they know how it was formed.
One of the discoveries that led to the rethinking of the conventional theory is when a scientist noticed the evidence that the water flowed in the opposite direction of the Colorado when the canyon was being formed. Therefore it seemingly could not have formed it. This article discusses that.
Interesting.
Good to see science is willing to further explore additional natural causes for what we experience today.
Note no one is saying that the Grand Canyon was not formed by natural processes.
Geology is like TToE — always filling in the details and adjusting. Nothing discovered has ever changed the broad theory of the Earth’s formation (nor TToE).
If you want to see scientists REALLY argue (besides the all but discredited however still a source of funds AGW) check into the Theory of Gravity.
>>Does the Institute for Creation Research actually do any research?<<
>>>Yes they do.<<<
In the same sense that The Onion does investigative reporting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.