We can discuss time in a different thread, but for this thread I'll give you millions if years if that's necessary.
For the discussion of this thread, evidence would be anything that, beyond reasonable doubt, the canyon was formed by the river over millions of years.
Do you know the statistic of everything evolving by chance? 10 to the 70th power I believe. What source you have for that statistic?
Got the statistic. http://www.earthage.org/intro/odds_of_evolution_by_chance.htm 1/10 to the 340,000,000th power.
There is a thing called Google scholar - pulls up all the research papers and books on a subject http://scholar.google.com.au/schola...tnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&as_ylo=2000&as_yhi=2016 This is one of them [PDF] The mystery of the pre-Grand Canyon Colorado River-results from the Muddy Creek formation JL Pederson - GSA TODAY, 2008 - pvc.maricopa.edu ABSTRACT The Colorado River's integration off the Colorado Plateau remains a classic mystery in geology, despite its pivotal role in the cutting of Grand Canyon and the region's landscape evolution. The upper paleodrainage apparently reached the southern plateau ... The google scholar result came back with around 18,000 results - admittedly not all of those will be relevant but let us say 10% are - that would give you nearly 2,000 papers (rounded up) and with let us say an average of 2 scientific authors per paper (most science papers have more than one author) that would give you a minimum of 3-4,000 scientists who have published in this area. Now are you telling me all those people are wrong but you are right?
Our Universe did not develop by chance. The Big Bang is what is known as a White Hole or the point of ejection of Quantum Particle/Wave Forms that were sucked into a Black Hole in another Divergent Universal state of reality. At the moment that Universal Reality ended and was sucked into the Black Hole all that was left was a Point of Singularity where the amount of Mass was so great it ripped through the Membranes separating Alternate Divergent Universal states and ejected outside that system to form a new Universal Reality. The other calculations were done at Cal-Tech. AboveAlpha
We never could have guessed that someone who believes in creationism would have a problem with these scientific issues. They just happen to be some of the ones that would refute Creationist ideas. And I like how you called it "true" science, as if the science that goes against your view is some fraudulent and made-up. If you're interested in true science, you'll never find it using religion. Religion is emotion. Science requires logic. That's why you don't do science with your heart and you don't believe in omnipotent deities with your brain.
Because I prefer reality? No, it was geologically based. Lol, no. You claimed it was false with absolutely no evidence to,support the claim. I've explained how you need to prove the paper wrong. You seem reluctant to do what is required The paper I gave you Sure. I look forward to reading about that in your published paper. The river didn't go uphill
Formation of the Grand Canyon 5 to 6 million years ago through integration of older palaeocanyons http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v7/n3/abs/ngeo2065.html The timing of formation of the Grand Canyon, USA, is vigorously debated. In one view, most of the canyon was carved by the Colorado River relatively recently, in the past 5–6 million years. Alternatively, the Grand Canyon could have been cut by precursor rivers in the same location and to within about 200 m of its modern depth as early as 70–55 million years ago. Here we investigate the time of formation of four out of five segments of the Grand Canyon, using apatite fission-track dating, track-length measurements and apatite helium dating: if any segment is young, the old canyon hypothesis is falsified. We reconstruct the thermal histories of samples taken from the modern canyon base and the adjacent canyon rim 1,500 m above, to constrain when the rocks cooled as a result of canyon incision. We find that two of the three middle segments, the Hurricane segment and the Eastern Grand Canyon, formed between 70 and 50 million years ago and between 25 and 15 million years ago, respectively. However, the two end segments, the Marble Canyon and the Westernmost Grand Canyon, are both young and were carved in the past 5–6 million years. Thus, although parts of the canyon are old, we conclude that the integration of the Colorado River through older palaeocanyons carved the Grand Canyon, beginning 5–6 million years ago. continued.
So are you saying it came about on porpose? - - - Updated - - - I'm not using religion in this thread. Grand Canyon isn't mentioned in the Bible.
Because you assuming your thinking is correct and won't see the other side. Are you going to prove that? Look at the elevation of the river as it enters the canyon and then look at the elevation of the top of Grand Canyon. The river enters a mile lower than the top of the canyon. How is that possible? Which didnt refute anything I said. So I'm only correct if I publish a paper? Look at what happened to the guy that made "of pandas and people". So how do you explain it?
So how does this explain the fact that the river is a mile lower than the top of the canyon? - - - Updated - - - Probably a few weeks or months. Depending on the hardness of the ridge.
It came about because it had to. In the same way that LIFE is a byproduct of Universal Conditions. If the conditions and materials exist for LIFE to exist.....LIFE WILL EXIST!!! Human Beings on the majority do not have the ability to understand that there is NOT an actual beginning and end...as there is not. Time is perceived by our limited Human senses and limited Human mental capacity as having a Past, Present and Future. In reality Time is SPACE-TIME as one cannot exist without the other and they are each a part of one thing. Time in reality runs CONCURRENT. Quantum Mechanics shows us this. So does Particle/Wave Duality. Take a small amount of time and Google....Dual Slit Experiment Photons. It will explain a great amount to you and help you understand a few things specific to what I have been talking about. The best thing is YOU CAN DO THIS EXPERIMENT YOURSELF in about 10 minutes!!! AboveAlpha
http://scholar.google.com.au/ type in anything from Grand canyon formation to geology grand canyon paleontology grand canyon and you will get all the links you could ever want
Q: Doctor Morowitz, looking back at the book Scientific Creationism, what is your assessment of the rest of the section that you were referring to, through page 46, I believe. A: Well it then goes on to what I would consider a good deal of rambling, rather unscientific rambling. Unscientific in the sense that wherever an open question arises, it's referred back to an act of creation, whereas 512 A: (Continuing) the scientific approach to an open question would be to go into the laboratory and try to do the experiments or to set up a theory or to do the hard work, the enthusiastic science of going ahead and trying to solve the problem. And in the approach there, the unsolved problems are always referred back to the supernatural, rather than the scientific approach of `how do we go about solving them'. Q: Doctor Morowitz, you're a scientist studying the origins of life. How do you approach that subject in terms of your science? A: Well, I have certain reasonably detailed hypotheses about now the energy flows in the early pre-biotic system led to the chemical orderings in that system. And what I do is to set up experiments in the laboratory, where we actually introduce those flows into the system and then we conduct various kinds of chemical and physical investigations of the systems that are subject to these energy flows to see now they organize under those flows. Q: Do you then publish your work as it proceeds? A: Yes. Q: Doctor Morowitz, do you know of any creation science experimentation regarding the origins of life? A: I am not aware of any creation science experiments in this area. 513 Q: Are you aware of any creation science literature- I'm sorry. Are you aware of any creation science publication of his theory of the origins of life in any reputable scientific journal? A: I'm not aware of it in any of the journals that I read. Q: Doctor Morowitz, we have been speaking mostly about the book, Scientific Creationism. What is your opinion about the other creation-science literature you have read, with respect to its attributes as science? A: Well, I think it's all very comparable. I think this is a paradigm example, and insofar as this is not science, the rest of the literature also is not science. Q: Doctor Morowitz, in your professional opinion, does the creation-science treatment of abiogenesis, the origins of life from non-life, have the attributes of science? A: No. Q: In your professional opinion, does the creation science treatment of the second law of thermodynamics have the attributes of science? A: No. MR. NOVIK: Your Honor, I have no further questions. MR. CHILDS: We will reserve our cross examination until after Doctor Gould's direct and cross. THE COURT: All right. Fine. Continue to Stephen Jay Gould's testimony Return to McLean v. Arkansas Documentation Project Home They do not have the data to form a Probability calculation based upon Life Evolving by Chance because LIFE did not evolve by CHANCE!!! Life EVOLVED in the same way that MASS generates GRAVITY!! LIFE is a byproduct of Universal and Multiversal Conditions. AboveAlpha
My thinking is based on observable evidence. Your thinking is based on disproven nonsense. Prove what? The paper I gave you is about geology. The river wasn't that low millions of years ago as the canyon began forming. Refuted everything you said. You're only correct when you publish a paper, it is peer reviewed and proves the previous science incorrect. Huh? read the paper
I wish to point out the obvious, at risk of getting dinged for flamebaiting.....if I offend I offer my apology. This member {Maccabee} is either a troll on patrol or an extremely uninformed individual with no intention of educating himself on the subject he is discussing. On occasion we see these situations arise and play with the perpetrator for entertainment value, keep on feeding the beast, giggle internally and await eventual boredom and dismissal. I would simply like to tell him directly what most in here are thinking: Your continued activity and discussion is making you look more ignorant with every key your fingers touch...and you should feel embarrassed for either the neural activity you show or the server space you waste.
The Grand Canyon of the Colorado River is a world-renowned showplace of geology. Geologic studies in the park began with the work of Newberry in 1858, and continue today. The Grand Canyons excellent display of layered rock is invaluable in unraveling the regions geologic history. Extensive carving of the plateaus allows for the detailed study of the Earth's movements. Processes of stream erosion and vulcanism are also easily seen and studied. The Colorado River has carved the Grand Canyon into four plateaus of the Colorado Plateau Province. The Province is a large area in the Southwest characterized by nearly-horizontal sedimentary rocks lifted 5,000 to 13,000 feet above sea level. The Plateaus arid climate produced many striking erosional forms, culminating in the Grand Canyon. The Canyons mile-high walls display a largely undisturbed cross section of the Earths crust extending back some two billion years. Three Granite Gorges expose crystalline rocks formed during the early-to-middle Proterozoic Era (late Precambrian). Originally deposited as sediments and lava flows, these rocks were intensely metamorphosed about 1,750 million years ago. Magma rose into the rocks, cooling and crystallizing into granite, and welding the region to the North American continent. 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. Rock layers formed during the Paleozoic Era are the most conspicuous in the Grand Canyons walls. Coastal environments and several marine incursions from the west between 550 and 250 million years ago deposited sandstone, shale and limestone layers totaling 2,400 to 5,000 feet thick. Layers from the Cambrian, Devonian, Mississippian, Pennsylvanian and Permian periods are present. Erosion has removed most Mesozoic Era evidence from the Park, although small remnants can be found, particularly in the western Grand Canyon. Nearby rock outcrops suggest 4,000 to 8,000 feet of sedimentary layers from the Age of Dinosaurs once covered the Grand Canyon area. Cenozoic Era (the Age of Mammals) layers are limited to the western Grand Canyon and terraces near the river itself. A few sedimentary deposits formed in lake beds, but the most spectacular recent deposits are the lava flows and cinder cones on the Shivwits and Uinkaret plateaus. Volcanic activity began about six million years ago and has continued to within the last several thousand years. Spectacular lava cascades down the Canyon walls have helped date the Grand Canyons carving. The Grand Canyon itself is a late Cenozoic feature, characteristic of renewed erosion during this time. Vigorous cutting by the snow-fed Colorado River carved the Canyons depth. Canyon widening is held in check by the regions dry climate. The asymmetry between rapid downcutting and slow widening results in the Grand Canyon rather than a more typical broad (and nondescript) river valley. Although violent storms may send flash floods gouging down narrow side canyons, the lack of steady moisture has created a stark landscape of mostly naked rock. Harder, erosion-resistant rocks such as the Coconino Sandstone and the Redwall Limestone have eroded into bold cliffs. Softer layers melt into slopes like the Tonto Platform (Bright Angel Shale) and the Esplanade (Hermit Shale). The oldest, crystalline rocks are chiseled into the craggy cliffs of the Granite Gorges.
