Attack on free speech at Grand Canyon

A large portion of the scientific community is trying to ban a book called Grand Canyon: A Different View from being sold at bookstores near the canyon. As you may have guessed, the book in question presents a creationist viewpoint. Despite the main body of long-age books which surely must stand alongside it, one group is labelling this a "fundamentalist Christian takeover" of the Grand Canyon! Is there any reason why practising scientists cannot present their own interpretation of the evidence to the public without having their work withdrawn from the science section?More information: Here

You're exaggerating - it is only one bookstore run by a government agency that is involved at all. There is no censorship nor "book-banning" involved - and the whole reason for the fuss is that the book is not legitimate science - and I'd certainly say that the "Inspirational" section is a better place for religious apologetices.Now a question for you - are you saying that free speech means that any publisher has the right to demand that a particular bookshop stocks their book ? And can dictate where that book is shelved ? If not then how can you claim that there is an "Attack on Free Speech" ?

Heh. I was especially appalled when I visited my favorite bookstore - Borders - last week and found Wells' "Icons of Evolution", Behe's "Darwin's Black Box", and Johnson's "Darwin on Trial" shelved in the life-sciences section. I complained to the duty manager, but it didn't appear to change their minds about where to shelve them (might have had something to do with my suggestion that the appropriate place to "shelve" them was in the circular file ). Guess that censorship and attack on free speech is pervasive.

Here's another version of the story:http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?st...This bit is interesting:

quote:

---

Not only has the National Park Service in Washington given every encouragement to the sale of Mr Vail's book, it has - according to one secular interest group called Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (Peer) - blocked the publication of a detailed rebuttal of the arguments set out by Mr Vail's contributors.

---

The PEER press release referred to is at :
http://www.peer.org/press/415.html

Just wondering if you believe religious bookstores or religious historical sites should have "balanced" literature present so that people know there could be another interpretation to the one they present?

---

holmes

There will always be alternatives to any supposed facts concerning the Grand Canyon. Since no one was there "millions" of years ago then we can't rightly say what caused this geologic formation with any great deal of certainty. Neither do I put my faith in science like I used to when I was young. I prefer to experiment and test (if I can) myself.Anyway, I recently saw this abstract from a CNN commentary...---
CNN reported, A new book offering a non-evolutionist view of how the Grand Canyon was formed, featuring essays from 23 scientists (most with PhD's, many having conducted serious geological scientific research at the Canyon), is the object of an intense book-banning effort by leading evolutionists. They have demanded that Grand Canyon National Park remove the book, Grand Canyon: A Different View, from bookstores within the Park.The book, which claims the famous area can be no older than a few thousand years (contrary to the claims of traditional secular science, which contends the canyon is millions of years old), was unanimously approved by a panel of park and gift shop personnel, the Los Angeles Times reported.CNN reported that the National Park Service (NPS) in Washington, D.C. is preparing to draft a letter telling Grand Canyon administrators the book makes claims that fall outside accepted science... so it likely won’t be restocked. Meanwhile, an NPS spokesman has confirmed that the book has been moved from the natural sciences section of the bookstore to an ‘inspirational’ one (which would thus downplay the book’s legitimate scientific message).
----From what I gather, it looks as if this whole book banning deal is true after all.--------
"I am preparing for WWIII...all shxt is going to hit the fan."[This message has been edited by Matt, 02-08-2004][This message has been edited by Matt, 02-08-2004]

How can the "legitimate scientific message" be diluted when the book doesn't have one ?And where is the evidence of banning ? Are you saying that if a publisher cannot dictate to a store that it must carry the book and must shelve it in a particular part of the store the book is being banned ? Because that is what the complaints are about. There is no general campaign to ban the book at all.

In Message #6, Matt wants to assure the reader that, "Since no one was there 'millions' of years ago then we can't rightly say what caused this geologic formation with any great deal of certainty."However, Matt, many honest, well-educated, and serious geologists and soil scientists work diligently to "rightly" show plausible and reasonable scenerios regarding millions of years of faulting and subsequent severe erosion at the Grand Canyon.See: Attention Required! | Cloudflare for references to some recent, plausible works that include ancient faulting as a contributory cause of radical downgrading of the Colorado River's flowline and subsequent sidewall erosion.Click here: Grand Canyon 3-D Tour to see a 3D view with a very brief narration also related to the effects of ancient faults opening a deep gorge into which subsequent sidebank erosion widened the canyon's severely eroded, and awesomely beautiful walls.For a brief summary and timeline of the sedimentary layers of the Grand Canyon, click here: Forbidden to view a site that also offers some pictures to enjoy.The viewer may click: http://www.casdn.neu.edu/.../staff/naylor/geo1212/gc_unc.htm to visit another Website offering pictures including some of Vishnu schist and gneiss that were deposited as sediments circa two billion (2,000,000,000) years ago! The Vishnu schist and gneiss are the roots of a primordal mountain range that has been eroded and lifted back to the surface over the past two or so million years.I kept the links simple so that anyone can enjoy their content. The Internet is full of excellent sources detailing the wonderous way that nature formed the bedrock and then cracked it open and eroded it down into the awesome Grand Canyon. Some of the sites offer dry, scientific discussions, and others are eye-popping pictorals. Explore and enjoy.The idea that natural fracturing of ancient sedimentary rock layers and subsequent long-term erosion resulted in a gorge as magnificent as the Grand Canyon doesn't provide a real sexy Hollywood-style creation epic, for sure.On the other hand, the totally incredulous theory that a one year long flood and subsequent drawdown could possibly create such extensive primordal erosion, sedimentation, layering, metamorphosis, and subsequent re-erosion does not give credit to nature where credit is due.Peace.[This message has been edited by Abshalom, 02-08-2004]

From what I see, it looks like the scientific elite is trying to get the book banned along with anything that goes against mainstream evolutionary teaching.According to the Los Angeles Times, sale of the book "was unanimously approved by a new-product review panel of park and gift shop personnel." So they saw nothing wrong with its content.Now, the first to challenge the book was Wilfred A. Elders, a professor from California who came across it on a visit to the canyon. Elders penned a scathing review of the book in the geophysics journal Eos in September. Then on December 16, the presidents of the American Geological Institute and six other scientific organizations wrote to the Park Superintendent urging that the book be pulled, or at least re-located away from other scientific works. The letter claimed that "implied approval or endorsement by the NPS for the book and others like it undermines efforts to educate the public about the scientific understanding of Grand Canyon geology(i.e. indoctrination)." Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) and the American Institute of Biological Sciences joined the attack later in December."Question:Why is it important for the public to know how Grand Canyon formed?That's just what I don't need. I don't need the government or some government funded institution to tell me how the earth or I formed![This message has been edited by Matt, 02-08-2004]

Oh, so when you talk about "banning" you mean exposing the unscientific nature of the book ?I ask again is there any attempt to force bookshops in general not to stock the book ? To seize and destroy stocks of the book ? Anything that could reasonably be protrayed as a general ban on the book ?Or is it just that one bookshop has decided to shelve the book in a more appropriate place and probably won't reorder it after they sell out ? Is that really all that you are upset about ?And if you really think that government-owned stores shouldn't carry books giving a scientific explaination of how the Grand Canyon formed at the site itself then you've got a bigger problem than just this one book.And here's another question - what are your sources ? I'm pretty sure that your "summary" of the CNN report didn't come from CNN.

I'm answering your first post to me, and then this latter post, here...1) What does evolution have to do with how old the Grand Canyon is? I am unsure where you were getting your info but if it refers to scientists that support an old age earth as "evolutionists" then the source is not trustworthy. In fact, the Young Earth theory (6K) had been overthrown by the scientific community BEFORE evolution.Old Earth--> GeologyEvolution-->Biology2) One of the major Xian movements to overthrow evolution accepts Old Earth geology. It is called Intelligent Design, and is being used to bring creationism back into schools. However, that creation is Old Earth. I believe even buzsaw (a resident hardcore creationist) accepts an Old Earth. The data is just that good... get used to it.3) The book you mentioned does not belong in the natural sciences section of a bookstore. It obviously is meant to promote faith, not science. I suppose there is a question of why a book of faith should be in a government run bookstore, I mean if it is questioning evolution/creation then it shouldn't be promoting one religion's creation story over another. But if it was moved to the proper area I wouldn't see a problem... and that sounds like it might happen. It's not exactly censorship, given they can only order or stock so many books. For example I doubt they have a book on nudism in the Grand Canyon (at the very least not in the science section). The book makers can always sell somewhere else... is that the ONLY bookstore?4) If you believe that censorship along these lines is so bad, and that alternate views should be available, do you believe religious sites should contain alternative explanations? If they do not, would that constitute censorship?5) If this is how you feel...

quote:

---

That's just what I don't need. I don't need the government or some government funded institution to tell me how the earth or I formed!"

---

...then what books are allowed to be at the Grand Canyon at all? I thought this book we were talking about was discussing it's possible formation?I find it curious that you seem to be offended having geology books sold at the site of one of the grandest geological formations on earth... and certainly in the US. If geology books are not appropriate there, where would they be appropriate?Question:Why are you so afraid of science that you cannot tolerate its existence? Do you have a problem with knowing the earth goes around the sun (an astronomical theory against literal biblical literature)? If not that, then what's the hubbub with a geologic theory on the grand canyon?As it is OTHER astronomical measurements put the age of the universe old enough that the grand canyon could be older than 6K.[This message has been edited by holmes, 02-08-2004]

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This book is promoting a view where the Grand Canyon was formed by rapid 'breaching' of massive lakes. This is also the view of many secular geologists. Given that this book is legally promoting a scientific theory, one to be challenged if you don't agree with it, and not forcibly withdrawn, and given also that the park authorities (the bookstore owners) approved it... why should the scientific community seek to stifle it?Think about it... in their letter, the prominent scientists at the head of this banning movement instantly addressed the book's 'religious overtones'. Is it objective criticism or is it an attack on the authors' beliefs?And even if the science authorities have legal power to decide whether this book should stay or not, why is it so imperative to them that it be removed as soon as possible? If the catastrophic theory is so ridiculous, as Abshalom claims, then surely the many long-age volumes would counter it effectively. So what's the problem?People should be allowed to look at the evidence and decide for themselves. As I said, some secular geologists agree with a catastrophic model for the canyon's formation, so it appears that attacking this book in particular would reflect an attack upon the authors' faith. Otherwise the authorities should have issued similar vetoes against similar theories proposed by non-religious scientists.An attack on personal faith is an attack on free speech.

Your entire post hinges on this being one reasonable scientific idea. Please supply the references to formal publications on this question.

quote:

---

This is also the view of many secular geologists.

---

Always being one to look at new data, or analyses of data, I thought it would be interesting to go find info on this "breaching" theory.Unfortunately defender I have found nothing in "secular geology". Sure the concept of breaching lakes is in geology, and perhaps in small sections of the canyon breaching may have occured, but as far as massive lakes rapidly breaching and forming the grand canyon? Zilch.You should recheck your sources if they told you secular geologists believe this, especially as the lakes necessary for causing this rapid breaching were postulated to have been caused by the biblical flood.

quote:

---

People should be allowed to look at the evidence and decide for themselves. As I said, some secular geologists agree with a catastrophic model for the canyon's formation,

---

I agree the evidence should be exmined. Here is a link which examines the evidence for both theories.You will note that this link treats both with "secular" hands, and breaching theory still fails as an adequate explanation... pretty much because it tries to explain things without actual evidence on one hand, in in contradiction to present evidence on the other.I would be interested in hearing how you answer the problems that breaching theory leaves unanswered. And once you have answers for those you might want to visit other portions of that same site and look at the formation of the plateau itself. Even if the canyon could have been carved by breaching, the material it breached was clearly laid out by something longer lived than the Biblical flood... and a 6000 year old earth.

quote:

---

An attack on personal faith is an attack on free speech.

---

I agree with this statement. However regulating what is sold at a state park is hardly an attack on free speech. As it is I was able to find the creationist materials on the internet just fine.Governments certainly have an interest in not delivering any and all information as valid scientific explanations of phenomena, just for equal air time. This would seem to fit the grand canyon case perfectly.For example at an observatory it would seem unusual for the government to be selling tracts in the science section of a bookstore, telling how the earth is actually fixed in space and the rest of the universe revolves around it... just because some scientists that want the bible to be true have come up with "some theory" to explain what the observations from that standpoint.Especially at a time when the US is falling behind in math and science knowledge compared to the rest of the world, it seems negligent to allow that kind of thing to be going on, just to promote biblical literalism in the guise of science.[This message has been edited by holmes, 03-09-2004]

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

And they still won't let me sell my Flat Earth material there either. FASCISTS!!! If they weren't so blinded by their globular biases, they might see the truth.[This message has been edited by Loudmouth, 03-09-2004]