RE: The rate of geological processes

Hi Michael,

I think you are going to be very good at this young-earth stuff. You show a
native talent. I might point out, however, that it isn't quite kosher to
date the paper upon which the picture was taken. It will give you an
erroneous date. the age of the paper doesn't exactly measure when the
photo was taken.

The funny symbols :-) is a smiley. Look at it on its side.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Roberts [mailto:michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk]
> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 4:40 PM
> To: Glenn Morton; Gary Collins; asa@lists.calvin.edu
> Subject: Re: The rate of geological processes
>
>
> Glenn
> Sorry about my delay in replying but I have the photo alleged by
> the Usgs to
> be 100 years old. I got it dated in the local labs at the University and
> they told me that it is only 19 years old. As a result your case is
> nullified and that the Grand Canyon has taken 84 years to erode. That is
> very slow as a 100 foot canyon was eroded on Mt St Helens in ONE DAY in
> 1980. Thus we could have expected if these observed erosional
> rates (and we
> can only accept OBSERVED rates as anything else is just not
> scientific) the
> Grand Canyon at 5000 feet deep could have been formed in 50 days, so 84
> years is relatively slow and shows how cautious we are.
>
> Michael
>
> P.s. What are the funny symbols at the end of your post?
>
>
Received on Fri Dec 5 22:05:12 2003