Sunday, December 31, 2006
Walt Brown Weighs in on the Canyon
This is completely Off Topic, but i really need a small help from someone who is more knowledgeable on the ID/Creation theories than i am.
Could you please contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org?
God bless you.
On the other hand, had the canyon been carved quickly and recently, there should be a delta.
Does this Walt guy have any geology chops at all?
Thanks for visiting?
To be honest, geology is my worst subject. I don't know enough about it myself. However, there isn't any other outlet for publicizing and discussing Creationist geology, so I like to do it here when I can.
His evidences are summarized here.
"Eight hundred cubic miles of sediments from inside the Grand Canyon were spread downstream from the Canyon, a hundred or so miles on either side of the present Colorado River. Today, these sediments, composed of rounded boulders mixed with clay, are exposed where streams have cut channels 100–200 feet deep. Rounded boulders show that they were transported by high-velocity water. Unsorted mixtures of clay and boulders indicate that the turbulent water suddenly slowed, depositing the unsorted mixture."
But as I said, I have no way to judge whether this explanation holds water (pun partially intended).
I'll see if I can find some other Creationists who know more about geology to weigh in positively or negatively.
I talked to a few people, and hopefully I am representing their opinions correctly.
Most of them thought that the _surrounding_ geology is the delta. The dirt was dug out by water and spread around the surrounding area (remember, this is a large flow, of which the water cutting the grand canyon is a part but not necessarily the whole).
Another option that was brought up was that the canyon could be, either in whole or in part, a tectonic feature.