• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Grand Canyon religious idiocy

TommyPain

New Blood
T
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
2
People who work at the Grand Canyon have been ordered (based on pressure by bush and his crimninals) not to give an official estimate of the geologic age of the Grand Canyon BECAUSE IT MIGHT OFFEND ZEALOTS.


"In order to avoid offending religious fundamentalists, our National Park service is under orders to suspend its belief in Geology" said a spokesman.

Per the zealots, The Grand Canyon was caused by Noah's flood. And, according to the zealots, george bush is an honest, hard working, humble christian.

Against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC.
 
TommyPain said:
People who work at the Grand Canyon have been ordered (based on pressure by bush and his crimninals) not to give an official estimate of the geologic age of the Grand Canyon BECAUSE IT MIGHT OFFEND ZEALOTS.

"In order to avoid offending religious fundamentalists, our National Park service is under orders to suspend its belief in Geology" said a spokesman.

Per the zealots, The Grand Canyon was caused by Noah's flood. And, according to the zealots, george bush is an honest, hard working, humble christian.

Against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC.
Click to expand...
Welcome to the forum Tommy. Could you give us a link?

While I see the religious connection, polemics, IMHO, is probably best in the Politics and Current Events Forum.

Thanks,

RandFan
 
I bet you they still give an estimate. Tour guides probably enjoy the science, and I could see the age of the Canyon adding to its majesty.

They should be quick to tell any visitor who asks what it is, and I'm sure the question comes up.

In a letter released today, PEER urged the new Director of the National Park Service (NPS), Mary Bomar, to end the stalling tactics, remove the book from sale at the park and allow park interpretive rangers to honestly answer questions from the public about the geologic age of the Grand Canyon. PEER is also asking Director Bomar to approve a pamphlet, suppressed since 2002 by Bush appointees, providing guidance for rangers and other interpretive staff in making distinctions between science and religion when speaking to park visitors about geologic issues.
Click to expand...

How much longer before this cantankerous prick gets out of the oval office? Science is knocking and it wants to know.
 
TheAntiLuddite said:
http://www.yubanet.com/artman/publish/article_48306.shtml

Unbelievable.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is.

I notice that two separate issues are intermingled so as to be virtually indistinguishable: this claim about suppressing the age of the Grand Canyon, and objections to the sale of a Creationist-oriented book. I also notice this piece appears to be a press release, not a straight-news story. A skeptic might suspect an agenda, here, as well as something less than impeccable honesty.

I'm neither a Creationist nor a fan of Georgie, but there's something about that article and the way its information is presented... Besides, I cannot object to the sale of a book, any book, by the Government or anyone else.

Edit: I just did some Googling, and the story's essentials are true. The basic story, however, is somewhere between two and four years old, as is virtually every article I could find other than the one cited in the OP, and so is not of crushing immediacy. I sincerely doubt that the book in question has changed anyone's mind, and I equally doubt that park personnel have been telling people the Canyon is 4.5k years old.

Sorry, folks, but there's nothing to see here. The sky is not falling.

More edit - Pasted from the National Park Service's Grand Canyon FAQ:

How old is the Canyon?
[FONT=verdana,sans-serif]That's a tricky question. Although rocks exposed in the walls of the canyon are geologically quite old, the Canyon itself is a fairly young feature. The oldest rocks at the canyon bottom are close to 2000 million years old. The Canyon itself - an erosional feature - has formed only in the past five or six million years. Geologically speaking, Grand Canyon is very young. (top of page)[/FONT]


Are the oldest rocks in the world exposed at Grand Canyon?
[FONT=verdana,sans-serif]No. Although the oldest rocks at Grand Canyon (2000 million years old) are fairly old by any standard, the oldest rocks in the world are closer to 4000 million years old. The oldest exposed rocks in North America, which are among the oldest rocks in the world, are in northern Canada. [/FONT]
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
When we were at the Grand Canyon in 2001 Ms. Tricky and I signed up for the short "Geology of the Grand Canyon" class. It only lasted an hour, so I knew it wouldn't be in depth, but at one point the guide asked, "How do you think the canyon formed?" I raised my hand and started talking about orogeny and stream downcutting and the ranger guide sort of interrupted me with, "That's right. It was erosion". One kid said "Noah's Flood?", and the ranger, without batting an eye said, "That's a very good explanation too. But the truth is, nobody is sure how it was formed." At that point I wanted to get up and slap the guy for suggesting that both of these ideas were equally good explanations. Fortunately, we didn't linger on that for long and got to the buisness of what the kids (it was mostly kids) wanted to do; Look for fossils.

Quite obviously the NPS is being careful not to offend any Christians by introducing them to reality.

Also, In the bookstore they had the kiddie book biblical flood version of the origin of the canyon. Ms. Tricky had to calm me down because I was threatening to "call the manager" and make a scene. Probably best I didn't. It would have just reinforced people's preconceptions about "angry atheists". Actually, I was just an "angry geologist".
 
When we visited GC back in January this year post TAM, I diaried here that there are the usual excellent National Park information signs throughout the viewing points on the South Rim. The one we saw at Hopi Point gave an excellent geographical precis of the canyon formation, with reliable dating. So it seems Bush & co. have not yet got around to having the much more visible signage "updated" to fairy tales yet.

I also noted a bunch of out-of-staters who scoffed when they read it - claimed "what would scientists know anyway". :rolleyes:
 
Tricky said:
At that point I wanted to get up and slap the guy for suggesting that both of these ideas were equally good explanations. <snip> Quite obviously the NPS is being careful not to offend any Christians by introducing them to reality.
Click to expand...

No, it's not so obvious. You admit you were ready to cause a scene in the bookstore; perhaps the guide was afraid there was an atheist like you and a creationist like you, both in the same crowd at the same time. The last thing he needed was to give the two of you a chance to get into it.

Fortunately, we didn't linger on that for long and got to the buisness of what the kids (it was mostly kids) wanted to do; Look for fossils.
Click to expand...

Even you thought it was a good idea to skip over that point as quickly as possible. Sounds to me like you and the guide were both more afraid of setting off a blowhard than of causing offense.
 
Last edited:
Beady said:
No, it's not so obvious. You admit you were ready to cause a scene in the bookstore; perhaps the guide was afraid there was an atheist like you and a creationist like you, both in the same crowd at the same time. The last thing he needed was to give the two of you a chance to get into it.
Click to expand...
Okay, that was a bit of an exaggeration. True I was annoyed and I felt like making a scene, but about the only thing I would have really done is write a letter to the NPS.

Beady said:
Even you thought it was a good idea to skip over that point as quickly as possible. Sounds to me like you and the guide were both more afraid of setting off a blowhard than of causing offense.
Click to expand...
Not really. It is just that, as I say, the group was almost all kids, most of them too young to grasp geological principles. It was too much to ask that they be introduced to them in such a short course. But I still wish I had been the one doing the teaching.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom