Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 121 (8781 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-19-2017 8:29 PM
336 online now:
AdminModulous (Modulous), JonF, Meddle, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus) (4 members, 332 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: evilsorcerer1
Post Volume:
Total: 816,498 Year: 21,104/21,208 Month: 1,537/2,326 Week: 873/345 Day: 111/124 Hour: 1/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   If Caused By Flood Drainage Why is the Grand Canyon Where It IS?
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18858
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.6


(2)
Message 1 of 10 (714940)
12-29-2013 8:00 PM


It seems that creationists are drawn to the Grand Canyon like moths to a flame ...

Here is a slightly different slant on the Grand Canyon debate:

Why does the canyon cross two high ridges when paths north and south are at lower elevations?

The darker green is higher than the lighter green, the red outlines would be the topographic level dividing dark from light.

So IF the canyon is formed by catastrophic flood flows draining the purported WWF, then

  1. Why are there no canyons in either the northern path following lower elevations, or the southern path following lower elevations?

  2. Why does water flow from the Kanab Plateau south to the Colorado River via Kanab Creek, which starts lower than the north rim, instead of the path shown by black arrows north of the canyon?

  3. Why does water flow from the Coconino Plateau north to the Colorado River via Meadow Creek which starts lower than the south rim, instead of the path shown by black arrows south of the canyon?

Does catastrophic flood drainage flow go magically uphill?

Creationists claiming the Grand Canyon is due to catastrophic flood drainage got some 'splainin' to do.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : clrty

Edited by RAZD, : list db

Edited by RAZD, : .

Edited by RAZD, : .


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by RAZD, posted 12-30-2013 9:39 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply
 Message 4 by roxrkool, posted 12-30-2013 3:36 PM RAZD has responded
 Message 7 by RAZD, posted 01-02-2014 6:23 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply
 Message 9 by Diomedes, posted 01-03-2014 3:26 PM RAZD has responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12523
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.0


(1)
Message 2 of 10 (714942)
12-29-2013 9:42 PM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the If Caused By Flood Drainage Why is the Grand Canyon Where It IS? thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18858
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 3 of 10 (714955)
12-30-2013 9:39 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
12-29-2013 8:00 PM


Kent Hovind's Laughable Lie
Here is creationist Kent Hovind and his (bad) argument for how the Grand Canyon was made:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ze5A2pua1E4

Typical mixture of some fact, some twaddle and a lot of innuendo and misrepresentation.

Note that the map in Message 1 shows why Hovind's explanation is completely bogus and doesn't work by his own argument that water does not flow uphill -- where the Grand Canyon crosses the ridge is not the lowest point of the ridge, but up on a slope to a high point between two lower points, so if he was correct then the canyon would be in a different location, one north or south of the current location as shown on the map.

Meadow Creek, btw, is a "barbed" connection , as are many other tributaries to the Colorado River west of the ridge, so his assertion that this never happens unless it is backflow off a dam is just more twaddle. There is no such general rule that tributaries can only connect to another river at acute angles -- water takes the path of least energy, whatever that is and wherever it leads.

As best I can figure, his large lakes and beaches are actually the inland sea that transgressed and regressed several times over a lot of the middle states, leaving many beach deposits and marine sediments during the late Cretaceous to early Paleogene, and which were saltwater not fresh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Interior_Seaway

quote:

The Western Interior Seaway (also called the Cretaceous Seaway, the Niobraran Sea, and the North American Inland Sea) was a large inland sea that existed during the mid- to late Cretaceous period as well as the very early Paleogene, splitting the continent of North America into two landmasses, Laramidia to the west and Appalachia to the east. The ancient sea stretched from the Gulf of Mexico and through the middle of the modern-day countries of the United States and Canada, meeting with the Arctic Ocean to the north. At its largest, it was 2,500 feet (760 m) deep, 600 miles (970 km) wide and over 2,000 miles (3,200 km) long.

The earliest phase of the Seaway began in the mid-Cretaceous when an arm of the Arctic Ocean transgressed south over western North America; this formed the Mowry Sea, so named for the Mowry Shale, an organic-rich rock formation.[2] In the south, the Gulf of Mexico was an extension of the Tethys Sea, which met with the Mowry Sea in the late Cretaceous, forming the "complete" Seaway.[2]


Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : barbed

Edited by RAZD, : seaway

Edited by RAZD, : clrty

Edited by RAZD, : ...

Edited by RAZD, : .


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 12-29-2013 8:00 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 1493
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


(1)
Message 4 of 10 (714975)
12-30-2013 3:36 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
12-29-2013 8:00 PM


If I remember correctly, the Colorado River displays many examples of stream capture. Maybe that's something to include in this discussion as well. Or is that what you meant by "barbed connection?"

Here's a quick resource to help things along from Geology of National Parks, Volume 2:

quote:

Hows does a River System Evolve?

The Colorado River is a major through-flowing stream with a total length of 2450 miles from the Rocky Mountains to the Gulf of California. Like other streams, the Colorado developed in response to environmental variables over time; in the Colorado's case, its history has been more complicated. For over a hundred years, geologists have argued about possible courses and directions of flow of tributaries and ancestral streams that may have had some part in the Colorado's evolution. So far, no hypothesis has met with overall acceptance. The details of the problem are fairly technical, but some general principles that apply to stream development are outlined below.

Base level. The limiting surface to which a stream can cut down is called the base level. Sea level is the ultimate base level for through-flowing streams like the Colorado, but sometimes local base level, such as a lake, a reservoir, or an interior basin without an outlet, controls a stream's downcutting ability. The Colorado's base level has been affected by uplift and also by sea level fluctuations, especially during the Pleistocene Ice Ages. Moreover, segments of the river, probably before it became through-flowing, may have emptied into inland lakes that functioned as temporary base levels.

Gradient. A stream whose gradient (rate of descent, or slope) is low does not have much erosive power. But if an area is uplifted, the gradient steepens, increasing the velocity of stream flow. When this happens, a stream downcuts rapidly, especially if its volume of water also increases. Sometimes, during uplift, a stream is able to maintain its original course and cut a narrow trench down through bedrock.

Headward erosion and stream capture. While a trunk <<no idea what 'trunk' means>> stream is downcutting or entrenching itself, its tributaries lengthen themselves by headward erosion, which means that they cut back into a plateau or upland at the head of each valley. A drainage system that is favorably situated, perhaps flowing on weaker rock, for example, is able to erode headward faster and eventually intersect and capture the headwaters of a neighboring stream or drainage system. Geologists are sure that stream capture occurred numerous times while the Colorado was evolving into a major stream; but the details of how, when, and where these events happened is not clear.

The Key factors in the Colorado River's evolution are probably these:

1. The river's source area in the Rocky Mountains, in addition to the Colorado Plateau, has undergone a long series of relatively rapid uplifts since the end of Mesozoic time (65 million years ago). Overall, the Colorado Plateaus rose 5,000 to 10,000 feet. Stream gradients became steeper, increasing stream velocity and erosion capability.

2. More rain and snow fell in the Rocky Mountains as the elevation increased. In the colder Pleistocene climates, glaciers formed and grew. As more meltwater and runoff became available, streams gained volume. The streams that drained the Rocky Mountains were powerful forces in erosion as they poured out on the plateaus.

3. The climate of the plateaus was (and is) drier than the mountain climate. Therefore, the high-volume, swift rivers cut narrow, deep canyons. Because rainfall is low on the uplifted plateaus, runoff is not ample enough to widen the valley side slopes.

4. When the Gulf of California opened more than 6 million years ago, this lowered the base level for the Grand Canyon region and caused rapid headward erosion. The modern course of the through-flowing Colorado River was probably established after this time. Previous to the opening of this arm of the sea, the Colorado -- or ancestral stream that drained the Rockies -- flowed into the ocean at a different location.

5. The east-west Grand Canyon segment of the Colorado's course across the Kaibab Plateau is asymmetrical; that is, the river flows closer to the south side due to slight tilting that occurred during uplift. The fact that the North Rim receives more moisture and sheds more sediment also tends to push the river to the south side of the canyon. The rate of erosion on the Kaibab Plateau is greater because all of the precipitation falling on the north side of the river, drains to the south and into the Grand Canyon. On the South Rim, rain and meltwater also drain to the south; since the runoff goes away from the canyon, it has less erosional effect.

<snipped the rest as irrelevent>



This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 12-29-2013 8:00 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 12-30-2013 4:27 PM roxrkool has responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18858
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 5 of 10 (714976)
12-30-2013 4:27 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by roxrkool
12-30-2013 3:36 PM


Thanks roxrkool, not sure that will help the creationist dilemma though.

... While a trunk <> stream ...

Likely they mean the main stream that tributaries dump into (base elevations of the tributaries would be where they intersect the main trunk of the river).

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by roxrkool, posted 12-30-2013 3:36 PM roxrkool has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by roxrkool, posted 12-30-2013 4:41 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 1493
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 6 of 10 (714977)
12-30-2013 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by RAZD
12-30-2013 4:27 PM


Oh yes, duh! Like the 'trunk' of a tree. That makes perfect sense. I'm not a hydrologist/hydrogeologist so some of the terminology is unknown to me.

Well I don't think anything other than Creationist literature is going to help them in any discussion involving geology. But I thought perhaps understanding a few of the main controlling factors in stream development was handy: base level, gradient, and stream capture. When I first learned the concept of stream capture (or piracy), I thought it was absolutely fascinating. But that was pretty much the only thing I enjoyed about hydro.

Thanks for the help.

Edited by roxrkool, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 12-30-2013 4:27 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18858
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.6


(1)
Message 7 of 10 (715263)
01-02-2014 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
12-29-2013 8:00 PM


Northern and Southern Route Topography
Interesting site - USGS topo maps interactive
http://store.usgs.gov/...OT&layout=6_1_61_48&uiarea=2%29/.do

You can also download maps.

Northern Route

I captured this shot of where rte 89 crosses the ridge north of Grand Canyon:

The contours are at 40ft intervals and the two markers are on the 5600 ft contour with no other contour between them, so we know the highest point is less than 5640 ft.

The rims of the canyon are 7250 ft (south) and 7750 (north) ... and the high point of the Kaibab plateau is over 8400 ft ...

So the water would need to cut through (7250-5640 =) 1,610 ft of Kaibab Plateau before it gets to the elevation of the Rte 89 pass ...

A location that does not show any evidence of a water erosion channel across the ridge.

There's another pass a bit more north where another road crosses the Plateau, and its highest elevation is ~5800 ft and the width of water at the 7000 ft elevation is wider than the Grand Canyon ...

A location that does not show any evidence of a water erosion channel across the ridge.

That's a lot of water to just disappear or magically NOT flow downhill.

Southern Route

The highest elevation on the southern route shown is ~6460 ft, still ~800 ft below the canyon rim and this too would have a wide span of water at the 7000 ft elevation.

A location that does not show any evidence of a water erosion channel across the ridge.

Conclusion

Any flood flow that could have cut the canyon in its current location with the ridge intact would also have cut drainage channels in these locations. There is no evidence of drainage channels across these passes. There was no flood flow.

If flood flow carved the Grand Canyon then there should be at least two other canyons that would have been carved at the same time.

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : .


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 12-29-2013 8:00 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18858
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.6


(1)
Message 8 of 10 (715293)
01-03-2014 8:10 AM


Universal Problem: Flood Concept = deceitful god belief
Not only does the north passageway not show any evidence of water drainage across this low point in the ridge, but every pass in mountain ranges around the world do not show evidence of water drainage channel erosion.

What it comes down to is belief in a world wide flood is belief in a deceitful god that not only hides his work, but makes it look like an old earth, or ...

... the earth is old, very very very old.

Get used to it.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 644
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 4.2


(1)
Message 9 of 10 (715318)
01-03-2014 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
12-29-2013 8:00 PM


Does catastrophic flood drainage flow go magically uphill?

Well clearly, the fast moving water become ionized, thereby making it susceptible to a magnetic field. During the flood, the magnetic field of the Earth increased by MASSIVE orders of magnitude, thereby creating a 'pull' on the ionized water, making it 'magically' flow up hill! See? It's simple!

And at the same time, the Earth was in danger of attack from Lord Xenu and his fleet of spaceships. Fortunately, the greatly increased power of the Earth's magnetic field ended up negating Lord Xenu's deflector shields, thereby causing his ships to burn up in our atmosphere.

It's all SO obvious if you look at the evidence....


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 12-29-2013 8:00 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by RAZD, posted 01-03-2014 6:05 PM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18858
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.6


(1)
Message 10 of 10 (715321)
01-03-2014 6:05 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Diomedes
01-03-2014 3:26 PM


Well clearly, the fast moving water become ionized, thereby making it susceptible to a magnetic field. During the flood, the magnetic field of the Earth increased by MASSIVE orders of magnitude, thereby creating a 'pull' on the ionized water, making it 'magically' flow up hill! ...

D'oh!

Not just uphill but into the atmosphere as ions that then combined with other elements in the atmosphere to make the post noachin atmosphere and accounting for changes to 14C content and radioactivity in general ...

It's all SO obvious if you look at the evidence....

You are SO right.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Diomedes, posted 01-03-2014 3:26 PM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017