Replies

Before you dismiss a theory just because it does not help prove your point try doing a search on lava flows and the Grand Canyon. You will find US Park service documents and many Universities showing when and where the lava dams occurred. Nobody claims that the rate of erosion for the Grand Canyon was constant.

I don't think I made any point other than to say that if all Biblical teaching is fact, then there are a lot of people that need to start paying attention to all of it, and pick up the remainder of the Bible, especially that latest four-volume edition, where "casting the first stone," "turning the other cheek," and "doing unto others" are prominently mentioned. The focus placed by many Christians on the factual nature of the first book results from a willful ignorance of the crucial parts of the last four.

But I did come in on Karsus' comments about the gradual erosion, so I can see where you might think that I agree with him. I don't. I don't care--it's irrelevant to the issue I discuss.

See, I don't dismiss the theory because it helps prove my point to do so. Rather, I say that simply advancing another option for the reason the Grand Canyon is there doesn't prove yours, which is that there was a Creation in the last few thousands of years. Simply pointing out other possibilities for the Grand Canyon's presence doesn't take away the crushing depth of scientific evidence for another theory that does not agree with your own.

Thus, while I agree with you that no one claims that the rate of erosion was constant, including me--I never did make that claim, Karsus did--I disagree with the conclusion you want me to draw from it.