Here, I'll help. You posted a bad link, I give another that works.
Anybody can "devise" an "explanation" for how the Grand Canyon got there, using plausible sounding scenarios. For example, I can claim that a giant comet smacked the Utah plains, scratching out a huge track through NW Arizona, and then all the ice of the comet being liquidfied by the force of the impact created a vast flash flood that finished the job, carving out canyons along the original track. Why not?
Hypotheses aren't established as fact simply because they sound reasonable to the ear. For example, string theory today sounds EXTREMELY reasonable to both mathematicians and physicists, and yet everybody understands that it's not "an established hypothesis" until backed by experimental evidence. The current Grand Canyon hypothesis, being the result of 1) billions of years of sedimentary formation and 2) periods of geological uplift and river erosion, is backed by numerous corroborating evidence, and hydrological studies of how rivers erode canyons. For example, through actual experimentation (as well as computer simulations), it can be shown that no sudden flash flood can ever create a vast canyon of such deep complexity, only the steady erosion by a river with tributaries can produce such a result. There have been other cases of stupendous flash floods in geological history, and very different features have resulted, such as the "scablands" of western Canada, caused by sudden release of glacial moraine lakes.
Under critical analysis by peer review in other branches of science, such as tectonics, hydrology, paleotology, paleoclimatology, radioisotope dating, mechanics of solids, hypotheses based on a sudden creation of the Grand Canyon fail to stand up, which is one reason why many "young Grand Canyoneers" end up just rejecting the whole of science as being "biased".
2007-02-02 09:20:46
·
answer #1
·
answered by Scythian1950 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Why no longer if the earth became into flooded to the factor of each and every little thing for an prolonged volume of time then definite it would desire to nicely be. quite some animals died out then in the flood and persons to. So the flood took each and all of the fossils and buried them into the layers that we detect them in now in the rocks we have confidence simply by fact of the place a fossil is present day in a rock how a ways we degree the date of it yet while there became right into a brilliant flood it would clarify why it somewhat is there and is in simple terms thousands of years previous.
2016-12-17 08:12:41
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Your link is a dead end and no, the Grand Canyon was not formed by the great flood. The canyon is a bit over 2 billion years and has been formed by erosion caused by the Colorado River.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Canyon
2007-02-02 09:09:05
·
answer #3
·
answered by Gene 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
I will not even give your link a click, because it doesn't deserve one. When you realize that something as magnificent as the Grand Canyon could only be created by processes that are not constrained by biblical stories created for simple-minded people 6000 years ago, will we be able to welcome you into the 21st Century. Otherwise, you need to go back to the Garden of Eden and live there. Good riddance, I say.
2007-02-03 15:00:21
·
answer #4
·
answered by Amphibolite 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I do think that The Flood could have carved the canyon. It culd be responsible for other things too, like the sinking of Atlantis, or the extinction of dinosaurs. The Bible does say that there were large beasts that roamed the land.
2007-02-02 09:07:54
·
answer #5
·
answered by Skyline 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
How despicable that you want to make something as beautiful as the grand canyon, less ancient and magnificent than it truly is by working it in to your primitive creation fairytale.
2007-02-02 10:14:37
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
They have part of Noahs Ark on Mt Ararat in the middle East.
2007-02-02 09:10:23
·
answer #7
·
answered by science teacher 7
·
0⤊
3⤋