Summations Only

There are many kinds of evidence, including false evidence. According to whom? I have never heard of this requirement for evidence. Probably some are true believers. It seems that some people are easily deluded. What physical facts? Saying that there are physical facts is not evidence. This is not a fact. Where do you get your information? This sounds like an opinion, which is NOT evidence. Being laughable to you does not comprise evidence. We have been over this many times, Faith. Rapid processes do not indicate a young earth.

And it's still 'blithering nonsense'.

I'm thinking of slope retreat. I know Percy put up some numbrs a while back but I like to start from scratch. If all the slope/wall surfaces in the Grand Canyon were retreating at say a quarter inch in a hundred years, a pretty conservative guess wouldn't you think? that would be an inch in four hundred years which would be about 42,500 inches in seventeen million years or roughly 3500 feet of retreat of all the walls in the canyon. If all the slopes retreat by 3500 feet, wouldn't you have at most just piles of debris left after 17 million years, at least for all the formations within the canyon? The outer walls could still be in layers (maybe: the upper surface would have eroded quite a bit too) but pushed back over half a mile on both sides. With nothing but debris between them.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

If all the slope/wall surfaces in the Grand Canyon were retreating at say a quarter inch in a hundred years, a pretty conservative guess wouldn't you think? that would be an inch in four hundred years which would be about 42,500 inches in seventeen million years or roughly 3500 feet of retreat of all the walls in the canyon. If all the slopes retreat by 3500 feet, at least for all the formations within the canyon, wouldn't you have at most just piles of debris left after 17 million years?

---

Slope retreat would explain the width of the Canyon. The average width is 10 miles. More than 50,000 feet.So no, your argument obviously doesn’t make sense.

Um, if the geologic column was laid down in a matter of hours or days or weeks at the most, rather than billions of years, you'd have to give up your billions of yers for the age of the earth. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Slope retreat would demolish all the island type formations within the canyon where it is widest, as well as pushing back the outer walls, and lowering the height of the walls too. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The contrary should also be true. If the geologic column was laid down in a matter of millions to billions of years, you'd have to give up your YEC claims.But you won't accept any evidence that shows an old earth.So don't lecture us about evidence.

At its widest point, the canyon is 27 times as wide as you estimate it should be after 17 million years. Not that this really means anything, since the 'estimate' just seems to be a number you made up.

quote:

---

Slope retreat would demolish all the island type formations within the canyon where it is widest,

---

I don’t see why it should. If the island was sufficiently large or resistant, why couldn’t it survive ?

quote:

---

...as well as pushing back the outer walls, and lowering the height of the walls too.

---

I don’t think it should lower the walls directly - other erosive forces might do that, or if the land gets lower further away from the centre of the Canyon. Slope retreat is essentially widening the Canyon.And you are on record as saying that it is too wide to be accounted for by the conventional explanation, so I think you need to actually get some real figures rather than making contradictory guesses.

At that rate it would certainly be long gone in seventeen million years.But of course I think the canyon was cut by the retreating Flood waters and sometimes I get the paradigms mixed up, so I just added the 3500 feet feet to what exists now. Oh well.

All the slopes are eroding. That's clear from the talus at the bottom of all of them. We don't have a broad plain between the walls of the canyon, we have layered formations with talus at their feet.Yes it's too wide to have been cut by the river. But slope retreat is an ongoing process since it was formed. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

At that rate it would certainly be long gone in seventeen million years.

---

That really doesn’t make sense. The rate calculated based on the current size and 17 million years will show the Canyon as it is now after 17 million years. Obviously it has to.

quote:

---

But of course I think the canyon was cut by the retreating Flood waters and sometimes I get the paradigms mixed up, so I just added the 3500 feet feet to what exists now. Oh well.

---

That is a pretty obvious mistake. Maybe if you tried critical thinking you might manage to avoid a repeat.

There is none besides your radiometric dating. All the evidence of the way the strata were formed, their flatness and lack of erosion between formations, and the evidence that layers can form in a matter of hours, as shown by Mt. St. Helens and flume experiments, etc etc etc, all show rapid deposition. The oldest your evidence can suggest is maybe ten thousand years, but there is no evidence for billions in the actual physical form of the strata or any other physical facts.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

All the slopes are eroding. That's clear from the talus at the bottom of all of them. We don't have a broad plain between the walls of the canyon, we have layered formations with talus at their feet.

---

Which is why the Canyon is so wide.

quote:

---

Yes it's too wide to have been cut by the river. But slope retreat is an ongoing process since it was formed.

---

I guess we have another falsification if the Young Earth. Since the Canyon was clearly cut by the river rather than retreating flood waters (as has already been shown) we need a considerable amount of slope retreat to explain the width.

quote:

---

There is none besides your radiometric dating.

---

What about the evidence of massive erosion between formations ?

quote:

---

All the evidence of the way the strata were formed, their flatness and lack of erosion between formations

---

Ah, you pretend it doesn’t exist. Point to Coyote.