>Also, your dimensions of the canyon are wrong. In my previous post, I used
>the dimensions in km. Press and Siever say that the canyon is a mile deep,
>11 miles wide but 280 miles long!
This apparent disagreement about the size of the Grand Canyon is
symptomatic of the problem of viewing the Grand Canyon as a separate
entity. Where does the Grand Canyon begin? ...at the end of Marble
Canyon or Glen Canyon? Where does the Grand Canyon end? ...at the
beginning of Granite Gorge, Lake Mead, Iceberg Canyon, or Virgin
Canyon? We can and do define the beginning and ending of the Grand
Canyon to be some specific localities but in reality it is nothing more
than the deepest cut of a whole string of canyons along the Colorado
River and its tributaries.
When discussing the Grand Canyon we need to remember that in addition
to the erosion happening here, the Colorado River system was also
carving some other impressive canyon systems both upstream and
downstream from this point. This means that upstream from the Big
Ditch, Steve Austin's lake/breached dam theory (and Glenn Morton's
rough calculations! :-) ) also needs to account for the simultaneous
erosion of the following incomplete list of well known canyons on the
same drainage system.
Glen Canyon (Colorado R.)
Cataract Canyon (Colorado R.)
San Juan River Canyon (including the Goosenecks--incised meanders)
Canyon de Chelly (Chinle Cr.)
Escalante River Canyon
The Canyonlands Complex of the Green & Colorado Rivers
Desolation Canyon (Green R.)
Canyon of Ladore through part of the Uintah Uplift (Green R.)
Yampa River Canyon (in the Uintah Uplift)
Flaming Gorge (Green R. on the north side of the Uintah Uplift)
Westwater Canyon in the Uncompahgre Uplift (Colorado R.)
Unaweep Canyon in the Uncompahgre Uplift (Colorado R.?)
Dolores River Canyon
Dubuque Canyon (Colorado R.)
Glenwood Canyon (Colorado R.)
Black Canyon of the Gunnison R. (through the Gunnison Uplift)
In addition to carving these canyons, the Colorado River system was
also removing enormous amounts of sediment and leaving behind several
other well known erosional features such as the stairstepping sets of
cliffs throughout southern Utah (the new Escalante-Stairstep National
Monument) and Monument Valley (where a lot of those old John Wayne
movies, like "Stagecoach", were filmed!).
As the saying goes, "The Devil is in the details". In the past, Flood
geology explanations have repeatedly failed because they cannot address
the level of detail necessary to have a viable theory. At a cursory
level, flood geology provides an appealing simple explanation to a
complex science that many people do not study. It's appeal is
especially powerful for those of us who desire that the world around us
conforms to those pictures taught to us in Sunday School. I understand
that appeal. I started my geology education and career believing in a
young earth/flood geology world. The fact that I don't hold these
beliefs any longer is not due so much to any great arguments for or
against flood geology but simply to the large mass of details which are
so easily explained by conventional geology and such a conundrum that
is so commonly ignored by flood explanations.
Steve
[Disclaimer: The ...humble... opinions expressed here are my own
and should not be attributed to my employer]
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:: ////// Steven M. Smith Office: (303)236-1192 ::
:: |----OO U.S. Geological Survey Message: (303)236-1800 ::
:: C > Box 25046, M.S. 973, DFC Fax: (303)236-3200 ::
:: \__~/ Denver, CO 80225 smsmith@helios.cr.usgs.gov ::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::