[__ Science __ ] Remembering Spillover Erosion of Grand Canyon

[AIG.com]

We should remember an important fact—creationist and evolutionist thinking about spillover continues to make a significant contribution to our understanding of erosion of Grand Canyon.

Continue reading...

 

[Truthfrees]

We should remember an important fact—creationist and evolutionist thinking about spillover continues to make a significant contribution to our understanding of erosion of Grand Canyon.

Continue reading...

thanks for the info

 

[Barbarian]

Even most creationists now aknowledge that the Grand Canyon could not have been formed by a sudden rush of water. Entrenched meanders demonstrate that the canyon was cut gradually, when uplift of the Colorado plateau trapped the river into its channel from which it gradually cut into the underlying rock.

There is no physical way a sudden rush of water could cut such meanders. If someone can show the stream mechanics that would allow it, I'd be happy to see them.

 

[Truthfrees]

We should remember an important fact—creationist and evolutionist thinking about spillover continues to make a significant contribution to our understanding of erosion of Grand Canyon.

Continue reading...

a current day short term example of what you are saying

Canyon carved in just three days in Texas flood: Insight into ancient flood events on Earth and Mars

In the summer of 2002, a week of heavy rains in Central Texas caused Canyon Lake -- the reservoir of the Canyon Dam -- to flood over its spillway and down the Guadalupe River Valley in a planned diversion to save the dam from catastrophic failure. The flood excavated a 2.2-kilometer-long...

www.sciencedaily.com

 

[Barbarian]

The problem for creationists is that the canyon formed by the Texas flooding has no entrenched meanders as the Grand Canyon and similar canyons do. This is because such meanders can only be formed gradually, by an ancient river bed undergoing uplift, which locks it into its channel and has to cut deeper and deeper instead cutting new channels as old rivers normally do.

There is an excellent example of a catastrophic flood in the Scablands. But again, nothing like the Grand Canyon. It looks just the way you'd expect a huge rush of water to affect landscape.

Scablands formed by catastrophic flooding.

Entrenched meanders, Grand Canyon

 

[Cygnus]

Even most creationists now aknowledge that the Grand Canyon could not have been formed by a sudden rush of water. Entrenched meanders demonstrate that the canyon was cut gradually, when uplift of the Colorado plateau trapped the river into its channel from which it gradually cut into the underlying rock.

There is no physical way a sudden rush of water could cut such meanders. If someone can show the stream mechanics that would allow it, I'd be happy to see them.

Who says a sudden rush of water cut the meanders? Many argue a large lake had water running from it for quite a while and formed a meandering template for the larger rush of water that would enlarge the meandering pre-existing water pathway.

 

[Barbarian]

Who says a sudden rush of water cut the meanders? Many argue a large lake had water running from it for quite a while and formed a meandering template for the larger rush of water that would enlarge the meandering pre-existing water pathway.

That won't work. As in the scablands flood, a huge rush of water will erase meanders and gouge out a large u-shaped valley. Hydrology 101.

Entrenched meanders can only form in slow-moving old rivers that are uplifted and rejuvenated, as the colorado plateau is. The reason they meander is that slow-moving water cuts outside corners and builds up inside corners. Uplift speeds the process and "entrenches" the stream in an existing bed. Cataclysmic floods like the one that formed the Scablands, erases meanders.

 

[Cygnus]

That won't work. As in the scablands flood, a huge rush of water will erase meanders and gouge out a large u-shaped valley. Hydrology 101.

Entrenched meanders can only form in slow-moving old rivers that are uplifted and rejuvenated, as the colorado plateau is. The reason they meander is that slow-moving water cuts outside corners and builds up inside corners. Uplift speeds the process and "entrenches" the stream in an existing bed. Cataclysmic floods like the one that formed the Scablands, erases meanders.

The GC was formed post flood.

 

[Barbarian]

The GC was formed post flood.

The flood would then have to be many, many millions of years ago; the river cuts down through layers of solid rock, which by actual measurements would take many millions of years even in the straighter parts of the canyon.

 

[Cygnus]

The flood would then have to be many, many millions of years ago; the river cuts down through layers of solid rock, which by actual measurements would take many millions of years even in the straighter parts of the canyon.

Solid rock? Really?

I don't now how hard the strata was at the time it was gorged...It wasn't soupy nor was it solid.

 

[Barbarian]

Solid rock? Really?

Yep. In places, over a kilometer high. Near-vertical walls of soft sediment slump after piling up just a few meters. You can see this in the gullies carved out of packed ash at Mt. St. Helens. So we know it was solid rock.

I don't now how hard the strata was at the time it was gorged...It wasn't soupy nor was it solid.

Geologists know it was solid when it was carved out by the river.

 

[Cygnus]

Yep. In places, over a kilometer high. Near-vertical walls of soft sediment slump after piling up just a few meters. You can see this in the gullies carved out of packed ash at Mt. St. Helens. So we know it was solid rock.





Geologists know it was solid when it was carved out by the river.

Sapping and the side channels can be seen all along the GC.

 

[Barbarian]

Sapping and the side channels can be seen all along the GC.

Those were also carved out of solid rock. Most are too deep to have been cut out of softer deposits. They would have just slumped as the deposts at Mt. St. Helens demonstrate.

 

[Cygnus]

Those were also carved out of solid rock. Most are too deep to have been cut out of softer deposits. They would have just slumped as the deposts at Mt. St. Helens demonstrate.

Reference please.

 

[dimmesdale1]

That won't work. As in the scablands flood, a huge rush of water will erase meanders and gouge out a large u-shaped valley. Hydrology 101.

Entrenched meanders can only form in slow-moving old rivers that are uplifted and rejuvenated, as the colorado plateau is. The reason they meander is that slow-moving water cuts outside corners and builds up inside corners. Uplift speeds the process and "entrenches" the stream in an existing bed. Cataclysmic floods like the one that formed the Scablands, erases meanders.

Are you asserting the Grand Canyon was formed over millions of years with no catastrophic events to speed up the process or screw up the old earth timeline? Why would we believe that when we observed these events
(tsunamis, local floods, earthquakes, volcanoes, etc.), and observe the results? None of what you seem to be asserting here was observed nor can it be fact-checked. The results are observed the process is deduced.

Are you asserting a lot of time and a little bit of water or a lot of water and a little bit of time?

Canyon Lake Gorge

The Guadalupe River flood carved out a gorge about 1 mile (1.6 kilometers) in length. It was over 50 feet (15 meters) deep in places. Keep in mind this was carving through solid limestone! This rapid canyon exposed rock layers from the Flood of Noah’s day while at the same time helping disprove this idea that it takes millions of years to form canyons! Researchers state:

Ham, Ken. A Flood of Evidence: 40 Reasons Noah and the Ark Still Matter (p. 115). Master Books. Kindle Edition.


From Wiki. Not a friendly source.

Typically, a steep-walled narrow gorge is inferred to represent slow persistent erosion,[6] but because many of the geological formations of Canyon Lake Gorge are virtually indistinguishable from other formations which have been attributed to long term (slower) processes, the data collected from Canyon Lake Gorge lends further credence to the hypothesis that some of the most spectacular canyons on Earth may have been carved rapidly during ancient megaflood events.[6] Additionally, because the flood conditions under which the gorge was formed are known, Canyon Lake Gorge provides a means of developing improved computer model reconstructions of pre-historic floods to determine water volume, flood duration and erosion rates.[8]
------------------------
These are observed, not speculated and it did not take millions of years. Diamonds, coal, oil, rubies all assumed to take millions of years all falsified, can be made in days. Observed and repeated.

 

[Barbarian]

Are you asserting the Grand Canyon was formed over millions of years with no catastrophic events to speed up the process or screw up the old earth timeline?

I'd be surprised if there were catastrophic events over that length of time. There just wasn't one capable of erasing the slow erosion of the riverbed.

Are you asserting a lot of time and a little bit of water or a lot of water and a little bit of time?

As hydrologists demonstrate, entrenched meanders can only happen with millions of years of constant erosion.

The Guadalupe River flood carved out a gorge about 1 mile (1.6 kilometers) in length.

The collapse of Lake Missoula carved out a much larger area. What no sudden flood can do, is produce entrenched meanders.

but because many of the geological formations of Canyon Lake Gorge are virtually indistinguishable from other formations which have been attributed to long term (slower) processes

Show us an entrenched meander produced by the Guadalupe flood. What do you have?

Diamonds, coal, oil, rubies all assumed to take millions of years all falsified, can be made in days.

By synthetic means, we can speed it up rapidly. But that doesn't mean it doesn't happen naturally, by slower processes. Indeed, we observe coal in all different stages of formation in nature. So that pretty much settles the question.

Here's what the erosion from the Guadalupe Flood looks like:

Kind of a lesser scablands. But not like the meandering Grand Canyon.

 

[dimmesdale1]

I'd be surprised if there were catastrophic events over that length of time. There just wasn't one capable of erasing the slow erosion of the riverbed.

Lol! There you go assuming. Need to look at the flood account. Things happening above and below and the depiction is earth destroyed.

As hydrologists demonstrate, entrenched meanders can only happen with millions of years of constant erosion.

Garbage. Water takes the path of least resistance. Your model appears to be a small amount over a large period of time which is unobserved, nor can it be fact-checked against what actually happened. It is not science nor is it compelling.

The collapse of Lake Missoula carved out a much larger area. What no sudden flood can do, is produce entrenched meanders.
Show us an entrenched meander produced by the Guadalupe flood. What do you have?

Showed what i had and you dismissed.

By synthetic means, we can speed it up rapidly.

Which falsifies long term. Your counterparts would have assumed it could never happen and they were proven wrong. Show us where they predicted short term results for formation of diamonds etc. it caught them flat-footed just like soft tissue in dino bones. There is a dating method ignored. Now you are saying the same with the grand canyon. The standard model has the colorado river over a million yrs of time. The problem with that is the mouth of the river lower than the canyon and water does not flow uphill. I could probably produce more examples of quick formation due to catastrophic but in your case faith and commitment cannot be falsified.

 

[tdidymas]

Lol! There you go assuming. Need to look at the flood account. Things happening above and below and the depiction is earth destroyed.

Garbage. Water takes the path of least resistance. Your model appears to be a small amount over a large period of time which is unobserved, nor can it be fact-checked against what actually happened. It is not science nor is it compelling.

Showed what i had and you dismissed.

Which falsifies long term. Your counterparts would have assumed it could never happen and they were proven wrong. Show us where they predicted short term results for formation of diamonds etc. it caught them flat-footed just like soft tissue in dino bones. There is a dating method ignored. Now you are saying the same with the grand canyon. The standard model has the colorado river over a million yrs of time. The problem with that is the mouth of the river lower than the canyon and water does not flow uphill. I could probably produce more examples of quick formation due to catastrophic but in your case faith and commitment cannot be falsified.

I would like to add that quick doesn't necessarily mean a week. It might have taken a year to carve it out, which would be relatively quick, and possibly slow enough to carve meandering. The Black Canyon in Colorado had to have been carved by a deluge, because water doesn't flow uphill.
TD

 

[Barbarian]

I'd be surprised if there were catastrophic events over that length of time. There just wasn't one capable of erasing the slow erosion of the riverbed.

Lol! There you go assuming.

Looking at the evidence. There's no evidence whatever for your assumption.

Need to look at the flood account.

Since it doesn't say the flood was worldwide, that won't help you, either.

As hydrologists demonstrate, entrenched meanders can only happen with millions of years of constant erosion.

Garbage. Water takes the path of least resistance.

You've been misled. The outside curve of a river tends to be eroded down, and the inside bend tends to have sediment deposited. That's how it works.

When a fluid is introduced to an initially straight channel which then bends, the sidewalls induce a pressure gradient that causes the fluid to alter course and follow the bend. From here, two opposing processes occur: (1) irrotational flow and (2) secondary flow. For a river to meander, secondary flow must dominate.

Irrotational flow: From Bernoulli's equations, high pressure results in low velocity. Therefore, in the absence of secondary flow we would expect low fluid velocity at the outside bend and high fluid velocity at the inside bend. This classic fluid mechanics result is irrotational vortex flow. In the context of meandering rivers, its effects are dominated by those of secondary flow.

Secondary flow: A force balance exists between pressure forces pointing to the inside bend of the river and centrifugal forces pointing to the outside bend of the river. In the context of meandering rivers, a boundary layer exists within the thin layer of fluid that interacts with the river bed. Inside that layer and following standard boundary-layer theory, the velocity of the fluid is effectively zero. Centrifugal force, which depends on velocity, is also therefore effectively zero. Pressure force, however, remains unaffected by the boundary layer. Therefore, within the boundary layer, pressure force dominates and fluid moves along the bottom of the river from the outside bend to the inside bend. This initiates helicoidal flow: Along the river bed, fluid roughly follows the curve of the channel but is also forced toward the inside bend; away from the river bed, fluid also roughly follows the curve of the channel but is forced, to some extent, from the inside to the outside bend.

The higher velocities at the outside bend lead to higher shear stresses and therefore result in erosion. Similarly, lower velocities at the inside bend cause lower sheer stresses and deposition occurs. Thus meander bends erode at the outside bend, causing the river to becoming increasingly sinuous (until cutoff events occur). Deposition at the inside bend occurs such that for most natural meandering rivers, the river width remains nearly constant, even as the river evolves.[7]

Even where the river is not forced to bend by a natural obstacle, Coriolis force of the earth can cause a small imbalance in velocity distribution such that velocity on one bank is higher than on the other. This can trigger erosion on one bank and deposition of sediment on the other

Meander - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Your model appears to be a small amount over a large period of time which is unobserved,

Actually, it's being constantly observed. That's how stream hydrologists know it works. On the other hand, your unscriptural world flood has not been observed, nor is there any evidence for it.

The collapse of Lake Missoula carved out a much larger area. What no sudden flood can do, is produce entrenched meanders.
Show us an entrenched meander produced by the Guadalupe flood. What do you have?

Showed what i had and you dismissed.

Your example has no entrenched meanders. In fact it looks like a small scale erosion like the scablands. But not at all like the Grand Canyon.

We can fact-check your assumptions by looking at things like the Guadalupe flood, the Lake Missoula catastrophe, and the gradual erosion of the Grand Canyon. As you see, your assumptions are not supported by the evidence.

I would like to add that quick doesn't necessarily mean a week. It might have taken a year to carve it out, which would be relatively quick, and possibly slow enough to carve meandering.

No possible way to carve out a kilometer deep channel in a year. Remember, these are sheer rock walls (if they weren't rock, they'd slump like the wall of sediment at Mt. St. Helens).

 

[Barbarian]

Which falsifies long term.

Nope. As you learned, it supports long ages.

Your counterparts would have assumed it could never happen

Sounds unlikely. Show us that from the literature. Any recognized scientific journal will do for the relevant subject. What do you have.

Show us where they predicted short term results for formation of diamonds etc.

That was in the 1800s. By the early 1900s, scientists were trying to make synthetic diamonds. The first commercially-feasible process was developed in the early 1950s. You didn't know that? It seems to have caught you flat-footed.

No one has found soft tissue in dinosaur bones although soft organic masses have been found. Tissue would require intact cells. Interestingly, this finding was another confirmation that birds evolved from dinosaurs. Would you like to learn about that?