Of course it stays in the channel. It CUT the channel. The river wandered around, always flowing in the easiest direction possible. Water isn't intelligent, it just flows downhill. Hard rock on one side of the flow, soft rock on the other side, it will erode the soft side first, and go that way. It flows downhill.
I don't think that we disagree here. The Grand Canyon was cut by the river that runs through it, not by the imaginary flood that supposedly flowed over it. If there was such a flood, it would have flowed around it: It could not have flowed over it.
According to the whole "flood theory" nonsense, the Grand Canyon was cut by waters flowing over it, which would have been impossible had it not existed in the first place, for the waters to flow through. Otherwise, the water would have flown around that particular hill.
The only logical conclusion is that the ground was rising as the water was flowing, and that the water chose the easiest way through. That way is called erosion. It happened simultaneously. The hill rose, and the water flowed in the only direction that it could; downhill. The water cut the Canyon. No great flood, just slow and simple. The hill rose, and the water adjusted. It never left the canyon that it was carving because there was nowhere lower for it to go.
What are you doing here?
Now let me explain the pixie theory of {poof}. There was a Flood, somewhere, perhaps. Most creatures were disfavored--for no particular reason. But some were saved, for no particualr reason. And then something else happened, and sure enough there were cows on green Alpine pastures in Switzerland and ranches in Texas. And the people were exceedingly great joyed by all this.
The opinion of cows is not recorded. IDiots at the Discovery Institute, however,...