Replies

Basic reality, you look at any sort of a real river which is more than a mile wide, the Volga, Amazon... and you expect it to be shallow, at least at the edges. I mean, you don't expect to take three steps into the Volga and then go straight down 1500'. Nonetheless, that's precisely what you see on the edges of the Grand Canyon, is this unbelievable vertical drop of 1500 or 2000 feet, sharp pristine edges everywhere you look mesas which would have been 2000' below the surface with sharp, pristine edges and features everywhere... Rivers just don't do that sort of thing. Moreover the topology of the river is basically fractal, with sinuous rills just everywhere and thousands of micro-tributaries if you want to call them that; you don't see that sort of thing with real rivers.

Basic bottom line, the Grand Canyon was blasted straight out of the rock by a fantastic electrical discharge between this planet and some other cosmic body, a comet, asteroid, or another planet, and most of the material from the canyon was either vaporized or blasted straight out into space. Real interesting spectacle, but you'd have wanted to watch from a considerable distance...

Number one, the river is wearing away at the rock -- at no point was the river 2000 feet deep; it may have only been 20 feet deep, but over the years the water wore away at the rock and the canyon formed. Also, the river bed changed course numerous times over millions of years, causing the various channels to be cut. One need not postulate any other mechanism than water erosion and time.

I asked you about the Gorge of the Brahmaputra. It bisects the Himalayas before dumping into the Bay of Bengal.

What's faster, water erosion or the tectonic raising of the landscape? Answer: water erosion, always.

Say a pre-existing river cuts right across where a tectonic compression is raising a mountain ridge. The rising of the land dams the water a bit. You get a bit of a lake, with a natural spillway in the old riverbed where the water flows over the rising hump.

The downstream side of the hump wears away faster than the river bottom upstream or downstream. What happens? The "spillway" erodes back to the "lake" and it all gives out with a big rush.

You can see this sort of thing everywhere. In the Sweetwater Valley, which I visited to reseach a book, there's a spectacular cut through a ridge of bare rock.

Note that, if the ridge is there before the river forms, the river channel simply forms in such a way to go around the ridge and that's that.

The Grand Canyon is not a problem for mainstream science. It's a problem for all the psychoceramics who would like to explain it any other way.

Basic reality, you look at any sort of a real river which is more than a mile wide, the Volga, Amazon... and you expect it to be shallow, at least at the edges. I mean, you don't expect to take three steps into the Volga and then go straight down 1500'. Nonetheless, that's precisely what you see on the edges of the Grand Canyon, is this unbelievable vertical drop of 1500 or 2000 feet, sharp pristine edges everywhere you look mesas which would have been 2000' below the surface with sharp, pristine edges and features everywhere... Rivers just don't do that sort of thing. Moreover the topology of the river is basically fractal, with sinuous rills just everywhere and thousands of micro-tributaries if you want to call them that; you don't see that sort of thing with real rivers.

Basic bottom line, the Grand Canyon was blasted straight out of the rock by a fantastic electrical discharge between this planet and some other cosmic body, a comet, asteroid, or another planet, and most of the material from the canyon was either vaporized or blasted straight out into space. Real interesting spectacle, but you'd have wanted to watch from a considerable distance...

I think I've seen everything now. A "fantastic electrical discharge"??? ROFL! I believe you've violated several laws of physics alone with that statement, but there are many better qualified than I to answer this claim. (RA, can you help here? Bode's Law, Roche's Limit?)

What about all the talus and detritus strewn around the canyon at rather inconvenient places such as alluvial fans and the like? I would think if the canyon was created by a massive electrical discharge that all that stuff would be gone, vanished, poof! And what about the evidence for massive lava flows from the Kaibab Volcanic Field? There's pretty solid evidence to suggest that at least a dozen or so of these flows actually dammed the Colorado River for periods of time before being breached and themselves being washed away?

I'll tell you truthfully, I have more respect for the Creationists attempting to fit the Grand Canyon into a great flood scenario than this electrical discharge nonsense. At least they have evidence for water being the primary mechanism of erosion.