classical_hero said:
let's examine that page, OK?
from one of the many articles (
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v24/i4/canyon.asp), which I chose at random:
from the site said:
It was said that the Colorado River, much as we see it today, carved out this immense gorge over tens of millions of years.
canyon
In recent years, Earth scientists have increasingly rejected that idea. Although they still speak in terms of millions of years, they consider that great volumes of water occasionally rushing through the area played a much bigger part in carving the canyon.
so far, so true: but the article implies (but doesn't claim) that 'Earth Scientists increasingly
duobt it took millions of years. That, simply, is not true: they doubt that it happened
as it does today (where the natural spring flood, that does indeed do a lot of the erosion, is checked by dams!).
So, they use cheap rethorics to instill a thought 'geologists doubt it took long' when in truth geologists just realized that it is less the all-year-round eroison but more the srping-flood eroison.
Cheap - and false!
but let's go on:
Creationist geologists agree that rushing water formed Grand Canyon. Some suggest it was Noahs floodwaters as they flowed off the continent (Genesis 8:3). Others suggest it was a post-Flood regional catastrophe caused when a huge mass of inland water, left over from the Flood (and excessive post-Flood rainfall), suddenly breached its natural restraints and rushed to the sea.
So they believe something - will we get any proof?????[/quote]
The idea that canyons invariably take vast ages to form is unfortunately very firmly cemented in the public mind. Even today, most school students are, regrettably, still taught the older, long-age model of formation for Grand Canyon, for instance.
Wo-hoa! Are they trying to refer to that 'it happened suddenly' that they tried to slink into the arguemntation above again? Well, I haven't so far on that site read anything that says: 'Earth scientists think is happened fast' - only 'earth scientists have now a slightly different opinion about the exact mechanics but we do not go into details now'!
Let me introduce you to Burlingame Canyon near Walla Walla, Washington, a small-scale analogy to Grand Canyon, which was observed to form in less than six days. It measures 450 m (1,500 ft) long, up to 35 m (120 ft) deep, and again as wide, winding through a hillside.
STRAWMAN ALERT!!!!!!
a) sudden erosion is dependent on the hardness of the rock - they do not say anything about it. Grand Canyon is carved into very hard rocks, I bet their Brulinganme Canyon is found in sot sediments!
b) sudden erosion is dependent on the amount of water available - if we scale their canyon up (which, in very soft sediments, is entirely conformal with occasional sudden water surges from normal rainfall) we need about all of earths waters to surge throguh Grand Canyon in maybe an hour :crazyeyes:
In 1904, the Gardena Farming District constructed a series of irrigation canals to provide water to this normally rather arid high desert area. In March 1926, winds collected tumbleweeds at a concrete constriction along one of the canals situated on an elevated mesa, choking the flow of water, which at 2 m3 (80 cubic ft) per second was unusually high due to spring rains. To clean out the obstruction, engineers diverted the flow into a diversion ditch leading to nearby Pine Creek. Before this, the ditch was rather small, at no location greater than 3 m (10 ft) deep and 1.8 m (6 ft) wide, and often with no water in it at all.
canyon layers
The abnormally high flow crowded into the ditch and careened along until it cascaded down the mesa in an impressive waterfall. Suddenly, under this extreme pressure and velocity, the underlying stratum gave way and headward erosion began in earnest. What once was an insignificant ditch became a gully. The gully became a gulch. The gulch became a miniature Grand Canyon.
The eroded strata consisted of rather soft sand and clay which was saturated by the recent rains. The dewatering of the saturated sediments into the now-open ditch enhanced the erosion. The rapidly moving water could dislodge the particles and carry them downstream, leaving underlying sediments vulnerable to further erosion. In total, these six days of runaway ditch erosion removed around 150,000 m3 (five million cubic ft) of silt, sand and rock.
Oh, what did I say?
scale different!
sediment different!
Yes, canyons can form rapidly.
Whoever claimed otherwise?
A good maxim to remember is, It either takes a little water and a long time, or a lot of water and a short time.
True
But then, weve never seen a canyon form slowly with just a little water.
Aha, you are uneducated and thus what you haven't seen may not exist
Whenever scientific observations are made, its a lot of water and a short time.
Nope, you just gave ONE example with SIGNIFICANTLY different conditions. incidently, the various formula one cna use to predict erosion that were used to calculate the millions of years for Grand Canyon DO GIVE weeks for a tiny thing in soft stuff.
So, what do we have:
- a bit on disinformation
- a bit of 'common logic' that is simply nonsense as the subject is out of common perception (or do YOU live 100,000 years?)
- a comparison that stinks from the bottom up
- a conclusion that is not even based on the presented data
RESULT: the article is total
meadow muffins!
This would turn a lot of deep sea trenches into shallows - allowing them to fall dry.
