If Caused By Flood Drainage Why is the Grand Canyon Where It IS?

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.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : clrtyEdited by RAZD, : list dbEdited by RAZD, : .Edited by RAZD, : .

Here is creationist Kent Hovind and his (bad) argument for how the Grand Canyon was made:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ze5A2pua1E4Typical 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.Western Interior Seaway - Wikipedia

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]

---

EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : barbedEdited by RAZD, : seawayEdited by RAZD, : clrtyEdited by RAZD, : ...Edited by RAZD, : .

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

Interesting site - USGS topo maps interactive
http://store.usgs.gov/...OT&layout=6_1_61_48&uiarea=2%29/.doYou can also download maps.Northern RouteI 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 RouteThe 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.ConclusionAny 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, : .

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

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 ... You are SO right.