A very smart man once said "proof is for mathematics and alcohol." Science never proves anything, it only gives us the best explanations based on the available information. New information routinely allows us to improve theories, but it rarely dismisses them outright.
So you have one guy who disputes. Was his dispute peer reviewed sufficient to alter theory or was it more a single opinion without widespread scientific support?
Quote Originally Posted by Maccabee View Post It has been a few years since I last was there at the rim of the canyon, but I read that there is evidence that a very long time back, a vast lake that was dammed up by nature finally broke free and water rushed down a river that eventually carved the canyon. But there was far more water then than now in the Colorado River.
Science is just a METHODOLOGY. It is simply the best system devised for us to begin to understand reality. The ONLY time a Scientific Theory an actually be labeled as PROVEN.....and I know in the past Theories were said to be proven because so much time had passed and they had not been proven wrong...etc... But unless a Theory can obtain a MATHEMATICAL PROOF.......then it remains just a theory. AboveAlpha
Evolution has been Genetically Proven upon a Molecular/Atomic Level thus tantamount to being a MATHEMATICAL PROOF. Evolution is no longer a Theory....it is a MATHEMATICALLY PROVEN FACT. AboveAlpha...p.s....ask a person who just got a Bacterial Infection which is now immune to standard antibiotic treatment.
Speed of Light is 186,282 miles per second. And because a Black Hole is a Singularity the rules of our Universe do not apply thus they have seen particle bursts coming from them. AboveAlpha
Did I miss it? At any point in his thread, did Maccabee explain HIS theory as to how the Grand Canyon formed???
But he himself didn't state HIS view....just did the usual Creationist "I'm going to try to shoot holes in Evolution and Geology" Routine?
Except we know what canyons formed by rapidly draining lakes look like, and they don't look like the Grand Canyon. http://mountsthelenswatch.blogspot.com/2007/07/when-lies-goes-deep.html
Maybe I've missed something but I didnt see anything in the link that disproves what I think happened.
Look up.... Inverse Square Law of Gravity........Ground Water Temps. at depth liquid and steam......and then calculate the MASS of the amount of water this moron in the video is talking about. AboveAlpha
If the Grand Canyon was formed only 4,000 years ago in a single flood event, then we would see erosion rates today far greater than we do.
Plus such a massive flood could not carve the canyon in the manner it has been. You can't erode some types of rock in such a short time. AboveAlpha
Moron in what video? BTW I'm a little rusty on math so what do you get when you sum up the calculations? - - - Updated - - - It was the flood it was lake(s) that formed shortly after. - - - Updated - - - It wasn't the flood. Plus if the sediments were soft then rapid erosion is possible
First of all run a search on the Inverse Square Law of Gravity. Gravitational Effect changes in any object of mass or celestial body when it's diameter increases. Mars for example only has 10.7% the Mass of Earth. Yet due to it's diameter a 100 lbs person would weight about 34 lbs. You increase diameter....you change the Inverse Square Law of Gravity. AboveAlpha - - - Updated - - - Not that rapid. Not even 1 Million years is enough time. AboveAlpha
Water moving that fast would also carve a straighter canyon. You only get the twists and turns we see from slow moving water.
So it would take millions of years to cut through soft sediments? If so can you provide a link? - - - Updated - - - You're assuming the sediments where rock hard for that to happen.
I'm assuming the sediments were rock hard because that is how we observe them today. You're assuming that geological processes which are very slow today were many magnitudes faster just a few thousand years ago. Where is your evidence?
To cut through a mile or more of rock....yeah!! AboveAlpha - - - Updated - - - Plus study Hydrodynamics. The water overflow would flow on the surface and not cut into anything. AboveAlpha
Look at any place where it was once mud and you'll see in a day or so it hardens. Exstrapolate that to several thousand years and you can create rocks. What is concrete? - - - Updated - - - If it was not rock then very quickly, same with the overflow.
It's not all soft. If you look at the layers in the Grand Canyon there are many different colors denoting many different types of rock. There are layers which contain IRIDIUM which is a Radioactive Isotopes that is common inside Meteorites and Asteroids. At certain layers the sedimentary rock age is confirmed by Iridium Levels and catastrophic meteorite and asteroid impacts upon Earth. AA
