Why only one Grand Canyon

Creationist here. The grand canyon was formed by the waters receding from the earth and with just the Bible one could of predicted canyons etc everywhere in 1500 B.C.
Yaro in post 25 beat me to the punch that there are canyons here and there demonstrationing a concentrating of water overflow as the Grand.
Also the present water level of the sea is higher then it would of been after the flood. The level then needed to be lower for animals to spread about quickly. I've read that in the water indeed way down beside present continents there are hugh canyons. I can't quote.I would add that the previous ideas about these great canyons being formed by slow processes is not only without evidence of any depth to back it up but it is unreasonable when looking at such holes to imagine anthing but a water disaster.
Truly it was just the premise that the present is the clue to the past that brought the error. And present slow water work would need time indeed. And also floods today can cause big change anyway so this should of been figured into the options.
Rob

This plateau thing isn't my bag. However because we believe in the shifting of continents probably the plateau was lifted and then the water came off it. But its not relevant to MY line of arguement.
Rob

A lot here.
The canyon would of been formed by indeed a great river that was the last vetige of the receding waters of the flood. The waters receded as it were gently off the land but at the end there was a collecting of the remainder that concentrated in a few areas around the earth for a few weeks or so etc. Acommon thing in talk about glacial runoff.
The Colorado river was a later squatter.As to why the rivers are here is for the reason they are. The Amazon and nile probably are only post flood rivers. The only rivers surviving the flood would be the ones the Bible uses to show where the garden of eden was. And they also were changed if you read the account.
Rob