Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Hunble
When I was a kid and was being taught Evolution - in Catholic schools no less - I would spend half my free time in the woods by my house. I would walk in the streams by my house an notice all of the very smooth stones in those streams. I was taught in school that these stones were smooth because of the millions of gallons of water that had flowed over them for millions of years.

I was also taught that the Grand Canyon was formed by gazillions of gallons of water cutting thru the canyon over billions of years.

But, as a silly little kid I saw a problem with this. The Grand Canyon was not smooth-sided, it was jagged all over. The Grand Canyon looked JUST LIKE the gullies that were formed OVERNIGHT sometimes when rain would wash thru eroded stream banks, or even newer dirt piles left over from construction sites. I would tell myself that these gullies looked just like mini Grand Canyons. Because they did look just like that.

I still believed in Evolution but it didn't make logical sense to me.

Much later in life I saw that the jagged edges of the Grand Canyon are much more logically explained as evidence of a quick wash-thru than a slow process.

If the Grand Canyon were formed over billions of years it would be as smooth edged as half-melted ice cream.

25 posted on 01/08/2004 8:17:29 AM PST by keithtoo (DEAN - He's Dukaki-riffic!!!! - He's McGovern-ous!!! - He's Mondale-agorical!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: keithtoo
If the Grand Canyon were formed over billions of years it would be as smooth edged as half-melted ice cream.

You are absolutely correct!

If the Grand Canyon was over a billion years old, I would have no problem with your example.

As the Arizona plateau was elevated because of tectonic movements of the Earth, the Colorado river continued to flow. As the ground elevated, the river cut a new channel into the newly exposed rocks.

If the tectonic uplifting movement has been more rapid than the erosion capabilities of the river, it would have formed a dam.

Next time you look at the Grand Canyon, pay attention to how wide it is. I can see erosion evidence for miles on each side of the central canyon, which is consistent with water erosion.

39 posted on 01/08/2004 8:31:19 AM PST by Hunble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

To: keithtoo
And the billions of cubic yards of material eroded from the Grand Canyon in a few days was deposited...where? What happens to that material when it leaves the deep canyon and enters flat ground?

Another thing to ponder. The Grand Canyon is formed in a very high elevation plateau. There is lower elevation ground all around. If there was a rapid release of water from a large inland sea, the water would have travelled north or south of the highlands where the Grand Canyon formed, not through it.

Another thing to ponder. If there was a Biblical flood it would have occurred all over the world at the same time, so there should be lots of Grand Canyons all over. Where are they?
40 posted on 01/08/2004 8:34:55 AM PST by BigBobber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

To: keithtoo
#25 is a fascinating observation. Thank you.
88 posted on 01/08/2004 10:15:13 AM PST by mombonn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

To: keithtoo
Well, those rocks probably haven't been in the stream for millions of years. Streams tend to pop up here and there, and rarely persist for more than a few thousand years. The rocks need not be much older than beach glass.

IIt's been too long since I've studied such things -- but I think the reason for the rough edges of the Grand Canyon is smaller-scale wind erosion and weathering (after the large-scale water erosion), which tends to cause chips and chunks to fall off at a time, particularly when the rock in question tends to fracture easily or, like sandstone, is made of a composite of granules and a cementing mineral.
169 posted on 01/08/2004 2:22:49 PM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

To: keithtoo
"Much later in life I saw that the jagged edges of the Grand Canyon are much more logically explained as evidence of a quick wash-thru than a slow process."

Not only are your observations correct, they are accepted by the rangers at the park. (well they may not go for the fast part) but they don't quaestion that water from other that the river cut the canyon. It's so obvious that the side canyons were formed by water decending down them. However it's also plain to see that the amount of water had to be in huge amounts not the little that is collected by them now.

Acually you can see the giant basin that surrounds the canyon in all directions for untold miles. What has not been explained is what caused the rim to uplift after the water was gone.
297 posted on 01/09/2004 9:37:44 AM PST by Clean_Sweep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson