Posted on 02/02/2004 3:47:15 PM PST by DannyTN
CNN reported, “A new book offering a non-evolutionist view of how the Grand Canyon was formed, featuring essays from 23 scientists (most with PhD's, many having conducted serious geological scientific research at the Canyon), is the object of an intense book-banning effort by leading evolutionists. They have demanded that Grand Canyon National Park remove the book, Grand Canyon: A Different View, from bookstores within the Park.
The book, which claims the famous area can be no older than a few thousand years (contrary to the claims of traditional secular science, which contends the canyon is millions of years old), was unanimously approved by a panel of park and gift shop personnel, the Los Angeles Times reported.”
CNN reported that the National Park Service (NPS) in Washington, D.C. is “preparing to draft a letter telling Grand Canyon administrators the book makes claims that fall outside accepted science... so it likely won’t be restocked.” Meanwhile, an NPS spokesman has confirmed that the book has been moved from the natural sciences section of the bookstore to an ‘inspirational’ one (which would thus downplay the book’s legitimate scientific message).
What is this if it is not blatant censorship? The Evolutionists have formed what amounts to a ‘cartel’ of influential liberals and agnostics who are bent upon silencing all challenges.
On the basis of elaborate non-proven theories, the Evolution Cartel now protects itself from scientific challenge by banning all books that don’t agree with their arrogant claims, which are fundamentally based on enormous assumptions that are then supported by circular reasoning.
Evolution Cartel Out of Step with Majority
According to recent poles, at least half of Americans believe in a recent “creation” of no more than 10,000 years. Some of the greatest names in science are among those who believe in recent creation.
In the 1960’s, I had the privilege of leading a scientist from the Rocketdyne Propulsion Laboratories to faith in Jesus Christ. Charles Morse then spent the rest of his life studying the Biblical account of creation and the universal flood.
Using some the world's most sophisticated computers, he set up models from scientific information that established a global flood had to have taken place.
From these models, he was able to interpret the geological records in scientific terms so that they supported a recent creation.
Evidence to Consider
Since Morse had been a naval officer in WW2, he had studied and had access to scientific oceanography data. This included the ‘mid-oceanic ridges’ with deep trenches traversing their length. These ridges extend along the length of all earth’s ocean. He also learned about the ‘river cones’, which are underwater river channels that extend along the ocean floor for over a hundred miles out from the mouth of every great river in the world.
Morse found that the Evolutionist’s explanation of the ‘river cones’ could never work. Evolutionists contend that the ‘river cones’ were etched into the ocean floor by slow moving currents that etched them out over ‘millions of years’.
(Whenever evolutionists are stuck for an explanation, they always seem to think that adding a few million more years solves everything.) But this could not explain how the underwater channels were formed.
These so called river cones are literally extensions of the rivers on the ocean floor. Only water moving at tremendous velocity would have the ability to carry the large rocks necessary to etch out such deep trenches on a line continuing out from the river on the ocean floor.
The same thing is true concerning the phenomenon of the Grand Canyon. If these were formed by slow moving currents over millions of years, why has this not taken place in other places where the rivers are about the same age?
Rivers such as Mississippi, Nile, Amazon, Euphrates, etc., should have produced similar phenomena. If the Grand Canyon is millions of years old, why has there not been more erosion of the steep cliffs?
The Biblical account of a universal flood better explains the geological phenomena of the Grand Canyon than does the evolutionist theory. If there was a universal flood, and it was caused to drain of the land rapidly as the Biblical account declares, then there would have been enormous amounts of water draining off at terrific velocity.
This would easily form the rivers and canyons we see today. And most important, it would also explain how the river cones were formed out from the mouth of every river into the ocean floor.
The fossil record is also explained best this way. Why do we find fossilized fish at the top of mountains all over the world? Why do we find evidence of sea life on land areas the world over?
Where Did The Water Come From?
Morse also dealt with the question of where the tremendous volume of water came from that would be needed to cover all the land mass of the planet.
The Bible says, “In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights.” (Genesis 7:11-12 NIV)
Morse observed that there could not have been enough water stored in the atmosphere to cover the whole earth. Most of the water came from what the Bible called “the springs of the great deep…” This is where the “mid-oceanic trenches” come in.
There is evidence that there were tremendously violent eruptions that took place in these Great fractures of the earth’s tectonic plates. There is also radioactivity coming from these areas. Morse reasons from the evidence that God used some kind of nuclear reaction to burst open the great fountains of the deep and release the water stored there.
Then Morse dealt with the problem of how that much water could be removed from the land masses of the earth. The geological evidence supports that God caused enormous forces under the continental plates to erupt and force them to rise upward. This caused the water to drain off with violent velocity.
This gives the best explanation of the evidence as to how the rivers, mountains and canyons were formed. The water velocity had the carrying power and force to move great rocks so as to quickly etch out what we see today.
In the final analysis, whether you are an evolutionist or a creationist, it takes faith to come to a conclusion about how the earth was created and formed.
I believe in creation because the God I worship has the power to do any of these things. And it explains the scientifically available fact better than the evolutionist theory.
Even Darwin Found a Better Way
As a matter of fact, even Charles Darwin came to that conclusion before he died. According to Frank Charles Thompson, God used the wife of the First Admiral of the British fleet to reach Charles Darwin with the Gospel. Here is what he reported:
“God used Lady Hope, wife of the first admiral of the British Fleet, to reach Charles Darwin with the Gospel during the last years of his life. He was bedridden, and she would often visit him. One afternoon, as he was reading this Bible, she asked, “What are you studying now?” “Still Hebrews,” he replied. “I call it the royal book. Isn’t it grand?”
When she mentioned how popular his theory of evolution had become he gave her an anguished look and said, “I was a young man then, with uninformed ideas. I thought out queries and suggestions, wondering all the time … and to my astonishment, those ideas took like wildfire. People made a religion out of them."
Later Darwin asked Lady Hope if she would share the Word of God with some of his friends in his summerhouse. She asked, “What shall I speak about?” He replied, “Jesus Christ and His salvation. Is that not the best theme?”
Dr. Victor Pierce, an Oxford scholar, says, “When some one tells you evolution explains everything, tell them that Darwin discovered a better theme — “Jesus Christ and His salvation.”
There isn't such a thing as a river THAT mighty, at least not on this planet (twenty miles across and a half mile or so deep).
Naturally enough once you get a channel like that from whatever cause, water will find its way into it but to claim the Colorado river created the canyon is like finding a cockroach living in one of King Ludwig's castles and thereby determing that the cockroach BUILT the castle...
Ah, yes, the old creationist game of "dishonestly quoting out of context".
This quote is from the paper, "Pragmatism versus materialism in stratigraphy" by O'Rourke. Menton dishonestly calls it a "concession" that dating methods are as circular as Mention (incorrectly) claims they are.
However, what Menton "forgets" to tell the reader is that while O'Rourke starts out by saying that dating methods may *look* circular, THE PURPOSE OF THE REST OF THE ARITCLE IS TO EXPLAIN WHY THEY ARE IN FACT NOT CIRCULAR. What a "concession" to the creationists, eh?
From the article's conclusion, which Menton either didn't bother to read or never actually understood:
As long as this cognitive process is acknowledged as the pragmatic basis of stratigraphy, both local and global sections can be treated as chronologies without reproach."If Menton's best "support" for his claim that dating methods are actually circular is to quote an article that conclude that they *aren't*, and then lie about what the author actually believes, just how much can we trust the rest of his twaddle?
-- O'Rourke, American Journal of Science, Vol 276 Jan. 1976 page 55
I don't have the time right now, or I'd show what's dishonest about each of Menton's "examples" of "dating gone wrong", but suffice to say that Menton has taken a handful of examples of cases where dating methods gave results that *looked* odd BUT FOR REASONS THAT WERE WELL UNDERSTOOD, while failing to mention the literally millions of times that those dating methods gave 100% consistent results with all other evidence and independent dating methods.
Contrary to what some crank creationists would have you believe, radiometric (and other!) dating methods, all based on different processes, methods, and "assumptions", all provide overwhelming and consistent and cross-checked evidence for exactly what scientists (real ones, not like Menton) claim they do. Scientists don't rely on these methods because they "support the evolutionary conspiracy" (*cough*), they rely on them because they *work* and they are *verifiably* accurate.
Is it your mistaken impression that it requires a river "twenty miles across" to carve a canyon that wide?
Second question: Does this look twenty miles across to you?
Third question: If the Grand Canyon was, as you seem to believe, by a torrent twenty miles wide, why is it so strikingly "V" shaped at the widest parts?
(Hint: Large short-lived flows cut "U" shaped channels.)
No, it isn't. It's my considered opinion based on decades of study.
As if creationists are the only ones with an agenda.
My agenda is to examine the evidence and accept what it indicates is the truth. What's yours?
So did the Glen Canyon Dam, built upstream of the Grand Canyon, reducing the flow to a trickle of its former self:
LMAO! Codswallop and Flapdoodle!
Balderdash, flummadiddle, poppycock, tommyrot. Jabberwocky too.
Well, from a Creationist perspective....
Evolution was a bad mutation! Fortunately the fittest theories usually win out in the long run.
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.