Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why only one Grand Canyon
tsig
Member (Idle past 2909 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 76 of 85 (163478)
11-27-2004 11:21 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by d_yankee
11-24-2004 10:35 PM


Re: R U Slow or something?
The Flood evidences are everywhere. The continental plates, the ocean floor ridges, the fossils, the frozen mammoths/giants, the Canyons, earthquakes, the prizm/rainbow, historic records of the different cultures and civilizations, the Pyramids/Sphinx showing water corrosion, bone and fossil findings in areas of the world where the animal did not or could not have existed and habitated,...etc...everything you see around us shows the fingerprints of the Great Flood...just open your eyes and mind for that matter.
The best explanation of the Grand Canon is that is the most impressive result of a process we can see happening right now. I thank all those who have contributed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by d_yankee, posted 11-24-2004 10:35 PM d_yankee has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by NosyNed, posted 11-27-2004 11:30 AM tsig has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 77 of 85 (163481)
11-27-2004 11:30 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by tsig
11-27-2004 11:21 AM


d yankee bluffing?
It appears that, in spite of his claims of expertise, d yankee isn't going to be quick to answer questions.
It might be early to call a "hit and run" but it looks like it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by tsig, posted 11-27-2004 11:21 AM tsig has not replied

  
Spicket
Inactive Member


Message 78 of 85 (163690)
11-28-2004 2:09 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by crashfrog
11-18-2004 4:32 PM


"transitional" forms
Come on, now. If this is to be something other than a civilized forum, I'll just take my brain and go straight home. We all know very well that by "transitional" is meant from one species to another. Evolution on a micro scale isn't what's doubted. There is no missing link, and there would have to be thousands. So just ease your finger off the trigger, crashfrog. Put the gun down. Let's be adults here, shall we?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by crashfrog, posted 11-18-2004 4:32 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by AdminNosy, posted 11-28-2004 3:43 PM Spicket has not replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 79 of 85 (163707)
11-28-2004 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by Spicket
11-28-2004 2:09 PM


Re: "transitional" forms
Topic please.
There is a number of threads on transitional forms. If you wish to make such dogmatic statements (and defend them) it would be nice if you would post to those.)
The Definition and Description of a "Transitional"
I might also note that calling a statment "silly" is pretty mild. We do enforce politeness here but if you are going to go home over having a statment called "silly" then you may as well leave now. That is not going to be censured by any of the admins.
Going beyond calling it silly (or even doing that) was off topic so he couldn't very well start saying why it is silly.
This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 11-28-2004 04:00 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Spicket, posted 11-28-2004 2:09 PM Spicket has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 80 of 85 (196885)
04-05-2005 9:51 AM


SonClad: Here's your place for Grand Canyon talk
In Message 26 SonClad wrote:
Take a look at the deep canyons that formed afterwards. Solid rock canyons were cut at St. Helens shortly after its eruption and take note of the irregular formations.
As has been pointed out many times in many forums, the canyon of the North Fork of the Toutle River (and any other "canyons" in the area, such as Engineer's Canyon) was not cut in solid rock; it was cut in soft, unconsolidated ash. We can see this easily because the walls of the canyon are not near-vertical (as we see in the Grand Canyon), but instead are near-45°:
See Re: Mt. St. Helens and Evidence for a young earth (note that the link referred to has moved to REPORT: Volcanic Debris Avalanches). And, from Volcanic Studies at the U.S. Geological Survey's David A. Johnston Cascades Volcano Observatory, Vancouver, Washington:
quote:
The debris avalanche that triggered the eruption slid north into Spirit Lake and west 25 kilometers down the North Fork Toutle River valley, covering the valley floor with unconsolidated debris to an average depth of 45 meters and as much as 180 meters in some places. Rapid erosion resulting from the breaching of numerous ponds and lakes on the deposit and surface runoff have produced a new drainage system on the avalanche. Streams following the initial drainage pattern quickly eroded narrow channels because of the generally steep slopes and the readily erodible character of the avalanche deposit.
{emphasis added - JonF}
Decreasing flood water dynamics and subsequent river erosion can certainly form the formations that we see in the Grand Canyon (even sharp angled turns and horseshoe-shaped hollows). Mount St. Helens: Evidence in Support of Biblical Catastrophism
There's no mention there of forming horseshoe bends and sharp turns. Let's see your evidence for this claim.
However, that side does include another picture of the 45° walls of the "canyon". It also includes the old and misleading "one-fortieth the size of" the Grand Canyon. It's more realistic to compare volume removed, whic results in the Grand Canyon being over 100,000 times larger than this Toutle River "canyon".
It also clains that the "canyon" was cut 140 feet deep. There's disagreement about this. There are topographic profiles measured February 24, 1982 and March 20, 1982 (before and after the mudslide) which indicate that the "canyon" was cut between 15 and 34 feet deep; see Error 400 (Bad Request)!!1.
On the flip side of your solid rock wall question - why do we not see similar deep canyons formed by the world's mighty rivers?
To some extent we do, such as Three Gorges of the Yangtze:
But there are several pages on this in this thread already.
A little more information at http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH581_1.html

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by SonClad, posted 04-05-2005 1:40 PM JonF has replied
 Message 85 by tsig, posted 05-11-2005 5:39 AM JonF has not replied

  
SonClad
Inactive Member


Message 81 of 85 (196954)
04-05-2005 1:40 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by JonF
04-05-2005 9:51 AM


Re: SonClad: Here's your place for Grand Canyon talk
Erosion during St. Helens:
Prior to the eruption of August 7, we drove vertical rows of 16-cm-long iron nails flush with the bedrock (breccia) wall in the stairsteps as high as 10 m above the floor. After passage of pyroclastic flows, the upper part of the stairsteps showed erosion of 4 cm or more, irrespective of height above the floor; thus, erosion was not confined to low parts of the stair steps. All nails from the stations near the base of the stair steps were removed by the flow and the configuration of the channel differed from that before the eruption. The parts of other channels low on the volcano flank also are deeper and wider with respect to the pre-May 18 stream valleys than those parts higher on the flank. Erosion was greatest where the pyroclastic flows traveled at their greatest speed near the base of the steep flank; there the flows abraded and scoured most parts of the bedrock channel to depths measured in meters. Furthermore, preliminary topographic contours suggest that pyroclastic flows of May 18 may have gouged out the base of the stair steps more than 35 m below the pre-May 18 surface. During the eruption of October 16-18, the walls of the stair steps were further modified by local removal of more than several meters of bedrock. For example, a nearly vertical, 10-m-high bedrock (breccia) cliff between the second and third step down from the top of the stairsteps became a gently sloping, 3-m-wide gully.
(Mount St. Helens in 1980, by the USGS )
If that isn’t persuasive evidence of the canyon-forming, rock-cutting power at St. Helens, consider the erosion during 1993 Midwest Floods:
Coralville Lake, named for the nearby town which was in turn titled for the area's fossil coral formations (Figure 3), was subjected to the historic floods of 1993 which devastated Iowa and the adjacent midwestern states. Water began to overflow the concrete emergency spillway on 5 July 1993 and continued for a period of 28 days. A maximum estimated flow rate of 17,000 cfs was reached on 24 July following closure of the normal outlet gates for seven hours due to downstream flooding of the Iowa River (Rogers, 1993). The water level in the lake at this time was 4.5 ft higher than the top of the spillway.
Figure 4 provides a view of the resultant erosion damage below the spillway, with the concrete spillway itself visible in the background. A 15-foot channel was eroded into the underlying bedrock (Anon., 1993), exposing the Devonian limestone which in evolutionary time is said to be some 375 million years old.
See photos:
here
Long link edited by AdminJar. Please use peek mode to see how it was done. In the future, try to avoid long links. Thanks.
This message has been edited by AdminJar, 04-05-2005 03:46 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by JonF, posted 04-05-2005 9:51 AM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Chiroptera, posted 04-05-2005 1:51 PM SonClad has not replied
 Message 83 by JonF, posted 04-05-2005 2:41 PM SonClad has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 82 of 85 (196958)
04-05-2005 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by SonClad
04-05-2005 1:40 PM


Re: SonClad: Here's your place for Grand Canyon talk
I have started another thread to discuss another aspect of the Flood/Grand Canyon question.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by SonClad, posted 04-05-2005 1:40 PM SonClad has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 83 of 85 (196965)
04-05-2005 2:41 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by SonClad
04-05-2005 1:40 PM


Re: SonClad: Here's your place for Grand Canyon talk
Arguing by quotes and links alone is frowned on here.
Prior to the eruption of August 7, we drove vertical rows of 16-cm-long iron nails flush with the bedrock (breccia) wall in the stairsteps as high as 10 m above the floor. After passage of pyroclastic flows, the upper part of the stairsteps showed erosion of 4 cm or more, irrespective of height above the floor; thus, erosion was not confined to low parts of the stair steps. All nails from the stations near the base of the stair steps were removed by the flow and the configuration of the channel differed from that before the eruption. The parts of other channels low on the volcano flank also are deeper and wider with respect to the pre-May 18 stream valleys than those parts higher on the flank. Erosion was greatest where the pyroclastic flows traveled at their greatest speed near the base of the steep flank; there the flows abraded and scoured most parts of the bedrock channel to depths measured in meters. Furthermore, preliminary topographic contours suggest that pyroclastic flows of May 18 may have gouged out the base of the stair steps more than 35 m below the pre-May 18 surface. During the eruption of October 16-18, the walls of the stair steps were further modified by local removal of more than several meters of bedrock. For example, a nearly vertical, 10-m-high bedrock (breccia) cliff between the second and third step down from the top of the stairsteps became a gently sloping, 3-m-wide gully.
1. We were talking about water erosion, not erosion by pyroclastic flow.
2. What was the total volume of material removed?
3. The description makes it clear that the eroded area does not resemble the Grand Canyon.
4. Did the eroded ara include any 180° switchbacks?
Coralville Lake, named for the nearby town which was in turn titled for the area's fossil coral formations (Figure 3), was subjected to the historic floods of 1993 which devastated Iowa and the adjacent midwestern states. Water began to overflow the concrete emergency spillway on 5 July 1993 and continued for a period of 28 days. A maximum estimated flow rate of 17,000 cfs was reached on 24 July following closure of the normal outlet gates for seven hours due to downstream flooding of the Iowa River (Rogers, 1993). The water level in the lake at this time was 4.5 ft higher than the top of the spillway.
Figure 4 provides a view of the resultant erosion damage below the spillway, with the concrete spillway itself visible in the background. A 15-foot channel was eroded into the underlying bedrock (Anon., 1993), exposing the Devonian limestone which in evolutionary time is said to be some 375 million years old.
OK. The photos make it clear that this does not in any way resemble the Grand Canyon. Yes, gigantic water flows can erode rock quickly ... but it doesn't produce features like the Grand Canyon, with near-vertical walls and 180° switchbacks and side canyons. The only reason that a moderatly narrow channel was produced was the guidance by the spillway. Flood runoff produces features like the Channled Scablands:

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by SonClad, posted 04-05-2005 1:40 PM SonClad has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by AdminNosy, posted 04-05-2005 2:55 PM JonF has not replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 84 of 85 (196971)
04-05-2005 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by JonF
04-05-2005 2:41 PM


Post Titles
Another reminder to all to think about the titles of individual posts. Thanks

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by JonF, posted 04-05-2005 2:41 PM JonF has not replied

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 2909 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 85 of 85 (206946)
05-11-2005 5:39 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by JonF
04-05-2005 9:51 AM


sandstone formation
Nice bit of work. Thanks
I guess the YEC'ers think sandstone forms in in 4000 years.
If the flood were true we should see grand canyons on every contitnet.
This message has been edited by DHA, 05-11-2005 05:43 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by JonF, posted 04-05-2005 9:51 AM JonF has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024