Why does Bush not allow the true age of the Grand Canyon to be told.?

Question

This may be one of the more bizarre stories we've seen (h/t Daily Kos) recently, which is saying a lot. Your federal government is apparently unwilling to investigate whether or not the Grand Canyon was created by the Biblical flood of Noah just 6,000 years ago. This is from a non-profit group of government scientists and related employees called Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, or PEER:

Washington, DC — Grand Canyon National Park is not permitted to give an official estimate of the geologic age of its principal feature, due to pressure from Bush administration appointees. Despite promising a prompt review of its approval for a book claiming the Grand Canyon was created by Noah's flood rather than by geologic forces, more than three years later no review has ever been done and the book remains on sale at the park, according to documents released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).
http://www.attytood.com/2006/12/weird_science.html

“In order to avoid offending religious fundamentalists, our National Park Service is under orders to suspend its belief in geology,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch. “It is disconcerting that the official position of a national park as to the geologic age of the Grand Canyon is ‘no comment.’”

In a letter released today, PEER urged the new Director of the National Park Service (NPS), Mary Bomar, to end the stalling tactics, remove the book from sale at the park and allow park interpretive rangers to honestly answer questions from the public about the geologic age of the Grand Canyon. PEER is also asking Director Bomar to approve a pamphlet, suppressed since 2002 by Bush appointees, providing guidance for rangers and other interpretive staff in making distinctions between science and religion when speaking to park visitors about geologic issues.

Hey Meg, just do a web search of "George Bush and the Grand Canyon". Read it for yourself.

Answer 1

Gorgeous; Because I see you as an attractive combination of intellect and insanity, I am simultaneously drawn to your questions yet disinclined to answer them (after all, no matter how carefully one considers an answer to a crazy person's question, it's not likely to make them any less crazy) In this case however, I think I can offer you some advise you can take to heart without compromising the lunacy you seem to cherish(or at least cling to) It's always useful to be at least half as suspicious of the sources you read and accept as those sources you reject. Always remember, everyone is selling something so never forget to check your sources. That PEER story has been discredited by a number of sources and has since been partially (and grudgingly) retracted by Peer. Despite the error, the story continues to be reported as fact by people who don't let facts get in the way of their political and social agendas(I refer here to your attytood.com link) I have included a link to a report on the story by Skeptic Magazine(if you're not familiar with Skeptic, I can assure you that if anyone ever accused them of being in any way Christian, the editors would choke on their own bile) I offer this gentle suggestion to you as I have noted you make liberal use of challengeable sources which more often than not speak to your insanity rather than your intellect.

Answer 2

As someone who visits the canyon frequently and has researched and written about the history of geologic studies there, I can say there is some truth to this story, but it is also somewhat exhaggerated.

There is no official order from the Bush administration for the park service not to give the scientifically accepted age of the canyon (ie: that the canyon is millions of years old and the rock layers are billions of years old). Park rangers will give you the correct answer if you ask them and as others have noted, the NPS Grand Canyon website also gives scientfically correct information and dates.

The controversy surrounds a creationist book called 'A Different View' that claims the canyon was carved by Noah's flood and that the earth is less than 10,000 years old. This book WAS forced into the park bookstores against the will of the park administrators, park scientists and the Grand Canyon Association which runs the bookstores. After some debate, it was moved out of the science section and into spiritually, but it is still there today. Nobody has ever come out and said WHO exactly in government forced this decision (the park does not like to talk about it), but there is little debate that it was done under pressure from the Bush administration in order to appease Christian fundamentalists.

On a larger scale, it is worth noting that even though the Grand Canyon is one of the most famous and popular geologic formations in the entire world and had a big role in the development of American science, there is currently NO museum at the Grand Canyon at all and virtually no public displays regarding science (or history or modern flora/fauna for that matter). The closest thing is a single panel along the rim near the lodges that gives a very brief 1 paragraph discussion of the river carving the canyon, but is very vague and does not go into dates or time.

Imagine going to Gettysburg Battlefield National Park and finding no museum or displays about the Civil War other than a one vague paragraph panel off in a corner.

Based upon frequent visits to the canyon and talks with park service people (again, they don't really like to talk about this), the impression that I get is that in order to avoid controversy (and perhaps jepordize their jobs), the park is taking a "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy toward presenting geologic science to the public. Rangers will give the scientific answers if you ask and the info is buried on the NPS website, but you really have to look for it and ask for it.

It is fairly clear that there IS some behind the scenes pressure on the park service from higher up to not publicize the scientific view of the canyon, but it has not gone as far as some claims make it sound (at least, not yet).

Answer 3

Bible Literalists!
When are people going to put 2 and 2 together and realise the Bible was not written as a scientific textbook on the process of universal creation but as a basic spiritual text and guide to living.
As for how old it all is, well that's for each person to decide for themselves, I'm of the opinion that the geological forces associated with such a structure would require either a glacier moving through the region to carve the canyon, or as scientists have proposed, the Colorado River carved it over millions of years. The Biblical Flood for a start is based on Sumerian Myth, which dates back beyond 10000yrs, and which is originally based on an Akkadian myth of even older origin, so anyone using Noah's Flood as a basis for major geological upheaval needs to check their Archeological facts!

Answer 4

-Your federal government is apparently unwilling to investigate whether or not the Grand Canyon was created by the Biblical flood of Noah just 6,000 years ago.

If the Federal Government investigates it's going to cost a bunch of money and accomplish what? If the estimates are 30 million years someone will say that's too long and others will say that's too short.

Anyone who says it was caused by the "flood" obviously doesn't understand geology at all. And anyone who says the Bible is all wrong and there is no God because the "flood" obviously didn't cover all the Earth doesn't know the propose of the Bible.

Who really cares how old the Grand Canyon is? Maybe a few geologists and Trivia Pursuit players? Who cares if Bush isn't doing anything to 'officially' date the Grand Canyon. Kennedy didn't do it. LBJ didn't do it. Nixon didn't do it. Ford didn't do it. Carter didn't do it. Reagan didn't do it. Bush 1 didn't do it. Clinton didn't do it. Why do you or anyone else even bring up the subject?

Answer 5

That is just another internet rumor. The fact is the park service DOES tell visitors of the millions of years it took to form the Grand Canyon.

Answer 6

I haven't visited, so can't say what the Rangers say. The NPS website does say the following -

'...Beginning about 1,200 million years ago (late Proterozoic), 13,000 feet of sediment and lava were deposited in coastal and shallow marine environments. Mountain building about 725 million years ago lifted and tilted these rocks. Subsequent erosion removed these tilted layers from most areas leaving only the wedge-shaped remnants seen in the eastern Canyon.'

Answer 7

There's a lot more about Bush to worry about than his Grand Canyon theories. He's pumping billions of OUR tax dollars into quasi-religious organizations like those run by Pat Robertson. Remember him - he's the one who wants to nuke the State Department and wants to "take out" foreign leaders he disagrees with.

Oh, and then there's Bush's complete disregard for our Constitution and taking people's property for the good of the "state" so his cronies can make millions off of stealing someone's home. It goes on & on.

Answer 8

The whole thing is silly let them go ahead and sell their book everyone with good sense knows the Grand canyon was not the result of Noah's flood it is just to silly.

Answer 9

Well studying that would be a waste of money anyhow. They already know that it wasn't created by the flood.

And there are dates on the official web site for some formations. It says 1.8 billion years.

Answer 10

Er...because Bush is probably OLDER than the Grand Canyon?