JonF has posted a challenge to this notion that "all the scientific data is there, it's just that Creationists merely interpret the facts differently.".Here he gives you a view of a meander in the Grand Canyon. How does a creationist interpret this evidence? Can it really be used in favor of the Biblical flood?
See this article for an explanation of how a creationist might explain this meander.
http://www.amazingdiscoveries.org/flood-p3.htmlThis article puts forth the notion that these meanders are actually a proof more of a flood than of a slow erosion over time.
Yes, a typical creationist "explanation". A wild claim, no references, no data, no discussion, no reasoning
A "huge canyon formed at Kanab Creek in a few hours during a recent flood. This river is also a meander." with no further reference. An explanation would include a discussion of why the author thinks the Kanab creek is the same as the Grand Canyon, and comparisons of the geology and the streams involved, with data and references to more information. Without that it's just blowing smoke.
Slow erosion would actually cause the meanders to gradually disappear.
No. Slow erosion incises meanders. Fast erosion does not
produce meanders. If there are meanders already present, incised in rock (not soft sediments), fast erosion can cut them deeper ... in a characteristic manner that's not seen in the meanders of the Grand Canyon.
Of course, if the Grand Canyon was produced in a few days/weeks by the drainage of a global flood, there would have been no preexisting meanders, and no meanders would have been created.
Has this notion been refuted? I honestly don't know. I'd be more than happy to take a look at whatever articles you can find that would refute this.
Try a basic geology textbook, especially "incised meanders".