Secular scientists keep reducing the age they suppose the earth to be.

[alang1216]

So, take a look a the Grand Canyon, and then tell me how long it took that to happen

the grand canyon maybe took a few days at the most to form ,,,

I presume you're talking about how long it took the river to carve out the canyon? How long did it take for the rocks of the canyon to be deposited, solidified and lifted a mile above sea level?

according to the geography the land was already there when the water cut through it,,,

True enough but not an answer to my questions.

irrelevant to the topic,,,

but if I had to answer I would say its evident from the outcome the sediment was deposited before the breech happened and had yet to solidify,,,

Sorry, I thought the topic was the age of the Earth?

Are you saying that the river cut through loose sediments that later became solid rock?

 

[progressive hunter]

So, take a look a the Grand Canyon, and then tell me how long it took that to happen

the grand canyon maybe took a few days at the most to form ,,,

I presume you're talking about how long it took the river to carve out the canyon? How long did it take for the rocks of the canyon to be deposited, solidified and lifted a mile above sea level?

according to the geography the land was already there when the water cut through it,,,

True enough but not an answer to my questions.

irrelevant to the topic,,,

but if I had to answer I would say its evident from the outcome the sediment was deposited before the breech happened and had yet to solidify,,,

Sorry, I thought the topic was the age of the Earth?

Are you saying that the river cut through loose sediments that later became solid rock?

where did I say that???

what I said is pretty clear,,,

 

[ReinyDays]

prove it,,,

Here's the USGS blerb on the matter ... "Geologic Provinces of the United States: Colorado Plateau ... if there's anything in there that you don't understand, I'll suggest a decent Geology textbook ... maybe spend some money and take a class at your local Community College ...

 

[progressive hunter]

prove it,,,

Here's the USGS blerb on the matter ... "Geologic Provinces of the United States: Colorado Plateau ... if there's anything in there that you don't understand, I'll suggest a decent Geology textbook ... maybe spend some money and take a class at your local Community College ...

why waste the money,, I can just look at it and see what happened,,,

its a breeched damn not a river cut through the mountains cause water doesnt run uphill or cut reverse barbs in the sides of canyons,,,

 

[ReinyDays]

why waste the money,, I can just look at it and see what happened,,,
its a breeched damn not a river cut through the mountains cause water doesnt run uphill or cut reverse barbs in the sides of canyons,,,

Prove it ...

 

[progressive hunter]

why waste the money,, I can just look at it and see what happened,,,
its a breeched damn not a river cut through the mountains cause water doesnt run uphill or cut reverse barbs in the sides of canyons,,,

Prove it ...

the evidence is right in front of you,,, all you have to do is look at it instead of believing what youre told to believe,,

 

[alang1216]

So, take a look a the Grand Canyon, and then tell me how long it took that to happen

the grand canyon maybe took a few days at the most to form ,,,

I presume you're talking about how long it took the river to carve out the canyon? How long did it take for the rocks of the canyon to be deposited, solidified and lifted a mile above sea level?

according to the geography the land was already there when the water cut through it,,,

True enough but not an answer to my questions.

irrelevant to the topic,,,

but if I had to answer I would say its evident from the outcome the sediment was deposited before the breech happened and had yet to solidify,,,

Sorry, I thought the topic was the age of the Earth?

Are you saying that the river cut through loose sediments that later became solid rock?

where did I say that???

what I said is pretty clear,,,

Not to me. What does had yet to solidify mean?

 

[progressive hunter]

So, take a look a the Grand Canyon, and then tell me how long it took that to happen

the grand canyon maybe took a few days at the most to form ,,,

I presume you're talking about how long it took the river to carve out the canyon? How long did it take for the rocks of the canyon to be deposited, solidified and lifted a mile above sea level?

according to the geography the land was already there when the water cut through it,,,

True enough but not an answer to my questions.

irrelevant to the topic,,,

but if I had to answer I would say its evident from the outcome the sediment was deposited before the breech happened and had yet to solidify,,,

Sorry, I thought the topic was the age of the Earth?

Are you saying that the river cut through loose sediments that later became solid rock?

where did I say that???

what I said is pretty clear,,,

Not to me. What does had yet to solidify mean?

solidify means to get hard,, so "had yet to solidify" means it wasnt hard yet,,

thats why the ground gave way in such a wide area and allowed the breech,,,

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

why waste the money,, I can just look at it and see what happened,,,
its a breeched damn not a river cut through the mountains cause water doesnt run uphill or cut reverse barbs in the sides of canyons,,,

Prove it ...

the evidence is right in front of you,,, all you have to do is look at it instead of believing what youre told to believe,,

So geologists devote their lives to studying this one region and phenomenon...but they manage not to see what is "right in front of them"?

You are, once again, intentionally saying things that are absurd for attention.

 

[progressive hunter]

why waste the money,, I can just look at it and see what happened,,,
its a breeched damn not a river cut through the mountains cause water doesnt run uphill or cut reverse barbs in the sides of canyons,,,

Prove it ...

the evidence is right in front of you,,, all you have to do is look at it instead of believing what youre told to believe,,

So geologists devote their lives to studying this one region and phenomenon...but they manage not to see what is "right in front of them"?

You are, once again, intentionally saying things that are absurd for attention.

they wouldnt be the first people to get things wrong,,

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

why waste the money,, I can just look at it and see what happened,,,
its a breeched damn not a river cut through the mountains cause water doesnt run uphill or cut reverse barbs in the sides of canyons,,,

Prove it ...

the evidence is right in front of you,,, all you have to do is look at it instead of believing what youre told to believe,,

So geologists devote their lives to studying this one region and phenomenon...but they manage not to see what is "right in front of them"?

You are, once again, intentionally saying things that are absurd for attention.

they wouldnt be the first people to get things wrong,,

But you would definitely be the first person to get something right, despite knowing less than nothing about it and being wrong 100% of the rest of the time about it. So the smart bet is pretty obvious, here.

 

[progressive hunter]

why waste the money,, I can just look at it and see what happened,,,
its a breeched damn not a river cut through the mountains cause water doesnt run uphill or cut reverse barbs in the sides of canyons,,,

Prove it ...

the evidence is right in front of you,,, all you have to do is look at it instead of believing what youre told to believe,,

So geologists devote their lives to studying this one region and phenomenon...but they manage not to see what is "right in front of them"?

You are, once again, intentionally saying things that are absurd for attention.

they wouldnt be the first people to get things wrong,,

But you would definitely be the first person to get something right, despite knowing less than nothing about it and being wrong 100% of the rest of the time about it. So the smart bet is pretty obvious, here.

who said its my theory???

I listened to experts on it and studied it and looked and compared the two theorys and made a choice cause one doesnt make sense when you consider all the facts,,,

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

why waste the money,, I can just look at it and see what happened,,,
its a breeched damn not a river cut through the mountains cause water doesnt run uphill or cut reverse barbs in the sides of canyons,,,

Prove it ...

the evidence is right in front of you,,, all you have to do is look at it instead of believing what youre told to believe,,

So geologists devote their lives to studying this one region and phenomenon...but they manage not to see what is "right in front of them"?

You are, once again, intentionally saying things that are absurd for attention.

they wouldnt be the first people to get things wrong,,

But you would definitely be the first person to get something right, despite knowing less than nothing about it and being wrong 100% of the rest of the time about it. So the smart bet is pretty obvious, here.

who said its my theory???

I listened to experts on it and studied it and looked and compared the two theorys and made a choice cause one doesnt make sense when you consider all the facts,,,

Nah, that's a lie. You listened to no expert that said any of that. Go peddle your lies to someone else.

 

[progressive hunter]

why waste the money,, I can just look at it and see what happened,,,
its a breeched damn not a river cut through the mountains cause water doesnt run uphill or cut reverse barbs in the sides of canyons,,,

Prove it ...

the evidence is right in front of you,,, all you have to do is look at it instead of believing what youre told to believe,,

So geologists devote their lives to studying this one region and phenomenon...but they manage not to see what is "right in front of them"?

You are, once again, intentionally saying things that are absurd for attention.

they wouldnt be the first people to get things wrong,,

But you would definitely be the first person to get something right, despite knowing less than nothing about it and being wrong 100% of the rest of the time about it. So the smart bet is pretty obvious, here.

who said its my theory???

I listened to experts on it and studied it and looked and compared the two theorys and made a choice cause one doesnt make sense when you consider all the facts,,,

Nah, that's a lie. You listened to no expert that said any of that. Go peddle your lies to someone else.

figured you were trolling again,,,

 

[ReinyDays]

the evidence is right in front of you,,, all you have to do is look at it instead of believing what youre told to believe,,

What evidence are we looking at? ... I see series of sedimentary layers, laid down over time in discreet sheets ... sometime after these sheets were laid down, a great river cut through and formed a Grand Canyon ... just like many many canyons throughout the world ...

Why the plateau was uplifted in a matter of plate tectonics ... if you believe in that stuff ...

 

[progressive hunter]

the evidence is right in front of you,,, all you have to do is look at it instead of believing what youre told to believe,,

What evidence are we looking at? ... I see series of sedimentary layers, laid down over time in discreet sheets ... sometime after these sheets were laid down, a great river cut through and formed a Grand Canyon ... just like many many canyons throughout the world ...

Why the plateau was uplifted in a matter of plate tectonics ... if you believe in that stuff ...

then show me how water goes uphill almost 3000 ft

and if its an uplift why did it only lift on the sides of the river and not under it,, you have the water uphill problem again,,,

 

[ReinyDays]

then show me how water goes uphill almost 3000 ft
and if its an uplift why did it only lift on the sides of the river and not under it,, you have the water uphill problem again,,,

We both know the first is nonsense ... water doesn't flow up hill ...

Not sure why you think just on both sides of the river ... the uplift extends from southern British Columbia all the way down to central Mexico ... the Inter-mountain West is a plateau ... the Columbia cut one of the better examples of this through the Cascades ... the Colorado diverted south when the Sierras arose ... and very slowly cut the Earth away as the land very slowly rose ...

Perhaps the part you're missing is that this land is ocean bottoms ... this is basically the Pacific Ocean when Pangaea broke apart ... as North America drifted west, it started over-running the oceanic plate there, which slid underneath ... right there where California ends today ... where the oceanic plate has slide under, the continent is pushed up ... typical back-arc country, numerous examples around the world ...

We know what we're looking at ... we've seen it before ...

 

[progressive hunter]

then show me how water goes uphill almost 3000 ft
and if its an uplift why did it only lift on the sides of the river and not under it,, you have the water uphill problem again,,,

We both know the first is nonsense ... water doesn't flow up hill ...

Not sure why you think just on both sides of the river ... the uplift extends from southern British Columbia all the way down to central Mexico ... the Inter-mountain West is a plateau ... the Columbia cut one of the better examples of this through the Cascades ... the Colorado diverted south when the Sierras arose ... and very slowly cut the Earth away as the land very slowly rose ...

Perhaps the part you're missing is that this land is ocean bottoms ... this is basically the Pacific Ocean when Pangaea broke apart ... as North America drifted west, it started over-running the oceanic plate there, which slid underneath ... right there where California ends today ... where the oceanic plate has slide under, the continent is pushed up ... typical back-arc country, numerous examples around the world ...

We know what we're looking at ... we've seen it before ...

hate to break it to you but the continents are not floating islands and cant float around to change their shapes,,,

we also know there were inland seas and the GC is the result of one of those seas breeching its southern bank and creating the GC during a short period of time while the sea drained,,,
thats how you get the high straight cut sides and the barbed canyons along with the big side canyons,,,

 

[james bond]

So we may find Earth can be 6,000 or so years old?

Darwin must be spinning in his grave .

 

[ReinyDays]

hate to break it to you but the continents are not floating islands and cant float around to change their shapes,,,

Then what causes volcanic arcs? ... like the Cascades or northern Andes ...

we also know there were inland seas and the GC is the result of one of those seas breeching its southern bank and creating the GC during a short period of time while the sea drained,,,
thats how you get the high straight cut sides and the barbed canyons along with the big side canyons,,,

Where would this inland sea be located? ... how big was it? ... when did this happen? ... [giggle] ... how does this event compare to the Scablands in eastern Washington? ...