- Sep 19, 2004
- 1,241
- 83
- 75
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
I don't know if I can do a better job, but here is why. If you look at the upstream edges of all the tiny canyons that come off the main canyon are pointed at the rim, they have side branches and some actually look a bit like fern fronds.. (Soon I will have 100 posts so that I can actually post pictures and send pms to people who send them to me, like herev.) see http://usgsquads.com/shopsite_sc/store/html/media/grand_canyon_chromotek_v2.jpgVance said:Ah, but that is just it, the Grand Canyon is, indeed, a perfect example. It is not the type of canyon that could have resulted from a catostrophic event. I will let Glenn explain why this is in more detail, since he can do a better job.
This can only form in subaerial situations. I used to work the east coast of the United States, looking for oil. I just scanned a small piece of a huge topo map from just off shore Massachusets. Note that the submarine canyons are single generation, they have no side canyons and never look like fronds.
The canyon didn't form underwater. The side canyons seen on the USGS map indicate that rain water pored over the edges and eroded the side canyons. Thus, if there was a catastrophic event, with the water flowing in one direction, you should have no side canyons. The side canyons have water flowing against the direction of the supposed catastrophic flood.
Upvote
0