Slashdot Mirror
Grand Canyon Is "Frankenstein" of Geologic Formations
sciencehabit writes "It's a debate that has vexed scientists for decades: Is the Grand Canyon young or old, geologically speaking? Both, a new study declares. A group of scientists reports that the famed formation is a hybrid of five different gorges of various ages--two of three middle segments formed between 70 million and 50 million years ago and between 25 million and 15 million years ago, but the two end segments were carved in the past 5 million to 6 million years--and the Colorado River only tied them into a single continuous canyon 5 million or 6 million years ago."
You have no idea what Frankenstein means, do you? Try reading it sometime. Here's a hint: start by reading the subtitle.
Wyoming's Devil's Tower formation will now be referred to as the "Ron Jeremy" of geologic formations.
That is all.
Have gnu, will travel.
yes yes yes.. it was all created in a "great flood".....
I refuse to believe in "erosion" as they teach in schools. Sure you can see water moves small clumps of dirt and rocks, but to jump from observing anthills being washed away to huge canyons and moving continents is absurd.
WHERE IS THE MISSING LINK? Surely there would be mountains with small streams caving in on themselves this very minute. It should be happening all the time. Not even on the daily news, because it should be normal, the erosionists claim. Like, whoops, another mountain just caved in and became a canyon.
There should be rivers moving cities out of the way and leaving canyons to hell in their path. The truth is, all we ever see are small floods, AND THE WATER ALWAYS RECEDES, AND DOES NOT LEAVE A HUGE CANYON.
Erosion is not science. You cannot observe it. All you can do is assume. Even William Phipps Blake, the guy who came up with this "theory" recanted on his death bed. Said he made it all up for money.
TEACH THE CONTROVERSY.
Which authority was that?
A formation is a layer of sediment that has been compacted into rock. There's more to the formal definition, but that will suffice for now.
The Grand Canyon cuts through dozens of formations, but cannot, itself, be a formation.
So much for "news for nerds."
In times of universal deceit, telling the truth gets you modded -1 Troll
Not the cobbled together monster!
Article X: The powers not delegated... by the Constitution...are reserved...to the people
For those who don't know, you can cruise through the Grand Canyon on the Colorado River via Street (River) view... but who the hell is the guy in the sunglasses?
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=grand+canyon&hl=en&ll=36.180562,-113.116608&spn=0.215596,0.885086&sll=-34.880632,138.660651&sspn=0.030277,0.055318&t=h&hnear=Grand+Canyon&z=11&layer=c&cbll=36.180623,-113.116661&panoid=3hhY7tdbII1RSBq3fRGQ6A&cbp=12,41.4,,0,-2.93
These gorges are not fooling anyone. They can add parts that are only 5 million years old, but they still look old as dirt.
Within a couple of weeks creationists are going to start pointing to this finding as evidence that scientists are never to be trusted. If they keep changing their mind on things, how do we know they are right now? If scientists can't give a clear answer, the creationists will argue, we must turn to the one eyewitness account we have of all history - the bible. Which is infallable, of course.
Satan, obviously.
They were each assimilated.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
I've heard that idea offered by geologists. Especially before the Colorado Plateau road. Like Coding Classes, Nature likes to reuse old structures if it can.
...say the Grand Canyon was formed last Tuesday, or something like that. Carved out by the Arc, that sat lower in the water because of all the dinosaurs on board. You betcha.
You shut up! Erosion is clearly real. My geography (or science?) teacher told us that the Grand Canyon was formed at the time and caused by the great Noah Flood!
(actually, that is a true story that I only remembered because of the "controversy" poast)
I live by the Grand Canyon. These scientists are idiots. Most of us that live here know that the Grand Canyon was formed in a very short period of time. It did not take millions of years to form. Scientist get one thing stuck in their head and then can't think of anything else. Answer me one question... if you can answer it then it will prove to me that the Grand Canyon developed over millions of years. Where is all the dirt?
With any river system where erosion occurs there is a delta. With the Grand Canyon system there is no delta... i.e... no erosion over millions of years. The erosion happened very quickly... most likely from 3 lakes similar to the Great Salt Lake that drained because a land dam broke in the top lake. The lakes drained into each other and over ran the lower lake's land dam. There is satellite imagery evidence of these 3 lakes that support his view.
Also there is other evidence to support this view. When Mount Saint Helens blew it created a similar canyon. There is also another “Grand Canyon” in Hawaii called Waimea Canyon. The Waimea Canyon was created very quickly as well. It was created when the land collapsed. In both of these cases there are no delta regions from long erosion periods.
Oh and for you closed minded people, no I am not a creationist.
...canyon explores YOU!
what's going on here