The Grand Canyon Paradox

Have any creation scientists tried to experiment and show that this whole OP is possible? I think (yes, just an assertion at this point) if one were to start with several hundred meters of sediment then cut out the equivalent materials of the grand canyon, the whole thing would simply sag and fill in without the steep canyon walls we find today. Is there a hypothesis from the creation camp that would allow this material to remain without invoking supernatural explanations?This doesn't even address the issue of maintaining distinct strata in all this material if one were to invoke the RAZD theory of hyper-tectonic plate motion(I assume the theory was in jest, but since no one else offered an explanation...).

---

"Debate is an art form. It is about the winning of arguments. It is not about the discovery of truth. There are certain rules and procedures to debate that really have nothing to do with establishing fact ” which creationists have mastered. Some of those rules are: never say anything positive about your own position because it can be attacked, but chip away at what appear to be the weaknesses in your opponent's position. They are good at that. I don't think I could beat the creationists at debate. I can tie them. But in courtrooms they are terrible, because in courtrooms you cannot give speeches. In a courtroom you have to answer direct questions about the positive status of your belief. We destroyed them in Arkansas. On the second day of the two-week trial we had our victory party!"
-Stephen Jay Gould

That's certainly what I would expect to happen. Please don't mistake my intentionally not disdainful tone as support of creationist claims. I am just trying to be a voice of civility. I feel neither the need nor the inclination to scream and rant and wave my arms to make a point. (Not Directed at you Matt)I think that even on a small scale such an experiment would fail to create any supportive evidence. One could even perform such a simple demonstration in their back yard.Edited by EighteenDelta, : grammar

---

"Debate is an art form. It is about the winning of arguments. It is not about the discovery of truth. There are certain rules and procedures to debate that really have nothing to do with establishing fact ” which creationists have mastered. Some of those rules are: never say anything positive about your own position because it can be attacked, but chip away at what appear to be the weaknesses in your opponent's position. They are good at that. I don't think I could beat the creationists at debate. I can tie them. But in courtrooms they are terrible, because in courtrooms you cannot give speeches. In a courtroom you have to answer direct questions about the positive status of your belief. We destroyed them in Arkansas. On the second day of the two-week trial we had our victory party!"
-Stephen Jay Gould