“Grand Canyon National Park is not permitted
By on Dec 29th, 2006 at 5:34 pm
“Grand Canyon National Park is not permitted
to give an official estimate of the geologic age of its principal feature, due to pressure from Bush administration appointees. Despite promising a prompt review of its approval for a book claiming the Grand Canyon was created by Noah’s flood rather than by geologic forces, more than three years later no review has ever been done and the book remains on sale at the park.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Hoffman
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
How does one even respond to this?
December 29th, 2006 at 5:39 pmSimply unreal. It’s like the Bush administration represents all the backward thinking of the Dark Ages.
December 29th, 2006 at 5:39 pmYou’ve
GOT
to
be
kidding????
I saw on the Discovery channel that a tsunami in the Mediterranean ocean occured in the same time period as Noah’s alleged month-long, world-wide flood. Must have been a mighty big tsunami to reach the inland of the Western United States!
December 29th, 2006 at 5:40 pmThe American Taliban strikes again!
December 29th, 2006 at 5:40 pmIn 1859, Charles Darwin made a crude calculation of the age of the earth by estimating how long it would take erosion occurring at the current observed rate to wash away the Weald, a great valley that stretches between the North and South Downs across the south of England. He obtained a number for the “denudation of the Weald” in the range of 300 million years, apparently long enough for natural selection to have produced the astounding range of species that exist on earth.
Dont worry, Darwin. There are some of us who still can see facts, not legends.
December 29th, 2006 at 5:41 pmDarn you, TP!
I was about to paste the article from a different site!
BTW: Nice to have you back on top of stories.
December 29th, 2006 at 5:41 pmMissed you.
I’m not sure where the facts come from on this story. It seems full of holes and spin. I’m as willing as the next person to bemoan the Bush Admin’s distrust of science, but I’m not seeing any facts. So, one book out of how many at “Grand Canyon” has spurious facts? None have the real facts? Employees have been directed to not discuss geology? I smell horse=pucky. Here is the National Park Service Web site on the geology of the Grand Canyon:
December 29th, 2006 at 5:44 pmhttp://www.nps.gov/grca/naturescience/naturalfeaturesandecosystems.htm
I was there in August and the geological facts were freely discussed by the Park Service employees.
We are as bad as they are if we promulgate factoids instead of facts.
If someone had told me back in the 80’s that in the year 2006-7 this kind of backwater thinking would be credible to some, I would have bet my soul they were wrong. I really hope that something profound happens this coming year to change things in this country. I’m sick of being so full of disgust and anger.
December 29th, 2006 at 5:48 pmHappy New Year to all.
What?! Please stop the insanity ~ Noah’s flood ? – give us credit for knowing fact from fiction. This administration never has dealt with reality – but fantasy. Thank you to those who are free-thinkers to keep this type of nonsense in check.
December 29th, 2006 at 5:52 pmChoking science to death. !! What world we are living in?!!..the world is moving forward very fast, yet we have brains like these overhere who refuse to bring facts to the table or debate logically ,but want science to yield to there backwardness ideas…What is next?!! Abraham lived on top of the Himalayan mountain?!!
December 29th, 2006 at 5:52 pmIs this it?
Are we officially dumbed down?
December 29th, 2006 at 5:55 pmAlright, I live 75 miles from this canyon. It appears only to be a couple thousand years old, you can just tell by looking at it.
Seriously, the Vishnu Schist at the bottom is some of the oldest rock found, at 2 billion years old. Was it put there after Noah’s flood, like from meteor or something?
December 29th, 2006 at 5:59 pmYep! It’s true and been true for over a year that I know of….When I was fighting all the junk over Pombo and the way our park service people were being treated I read about this….Don’t know where to re hook up with the info but it’s there…Blessings
Check out a few other thing’s like Chuck Norris and his blond wife stumping on late night TV for getting bible studies back in all the school’s..Geeees it just keep getting worse…If they want bible studies in school’s send their kid’s to bible school’s not public school’s…..
December 29th, 2006 at 6:02 pmGrand Canyon 6,000 years old? Hell no! I know for a fact it was dug out in the early-1800’s by Paul Bunyan wrestling with his ox Blue. I read it in a book when I was in the 4th grade, so it has to be true!
December 29th, 2006 at 6:02 pmDon’t confuse the issue with facts there fortruth. the bible has everything you need to know.
/sarcasm
December 29th, 2006 at 6:03 pmThere is a reason why Scanlon called them “the wackos” and Rove “the nuts”. Too bad for the rest of us, they have positions of power from where they can do serious damage.
These appointees should publish a book that explains how the canyon was created by Hussein detonating his WMD in the area -I mean, if you’re going to tell tales, you might as well go the whole way…
December 29th, 2006 at 6:04 pmVishnu Schist was created to look like it is 2 billion years old.
Before Christians came along, it didn’t exist at all. But then came the Christians, and a germanic Pagan said, “vat’s vish-nu shist?” and, well, there you have it.
December 29th, 2006 at 6:06 pmMaybe with all the upcoming investigations, the Bushies will be too busy to deny the geological forces that carved out the grand canyon over millions of years.
December 29th, 2006 at 6:07 pmComment by Briseadh na Faire
No crap? That’s what happened. Sheesh.
December 29th, 2006 at 6:09 pmLooking up the info about it got me all excited to go back, I want to complain about the book, in person.
December 29th, 2006 at 6:11 pmIf the christian god expects the believers to believe this stuff, he’s really a sick f*ck.
December 29th, 2006 at 6:13 pmI want to complain about the book, in person.
Comment by ForTruth
You should do it in a Borat-like character.
December 29th, 2006 at 6:16 pmThe inmates have taken over the institution.
December 29th, 2006 at 6:21 pmIs this not a violation of the separation of church and state?
It’s not a question of IF violations are happening, they clearly are. So how do you rectify it? Sue the government? Maybe we should look into lawsuits and see if that will give us redress. Besides the fact that Noah is a religious story, it is also a christian story. I’m sure there are plenty of other creation myths and so on from other cultures and religions, why are they not represented at the bookstore?
There is no way this book should be there. And the age of the canyon should be provided without regard to religious beliefs.
Let’s start some lawsuits. Wherever there is christian propaganda, we
December 29th, 2006 at 6:24 pmshould demand Hindu, muslim and other propaganda too. Then they’ll see how ridiculous holding up a single religion is. When they refuse to represent the other religions, which they will, we should drag them into court.
It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
– Carl Sagan,
December 29th, 2006 at 6:37 pmIt is long past time for cynical Republicans to decide what kind of world they want to live in. I’m not talking about the braindead evangelical Bush worshippers, but the corporate Wall Street types who understand what is going on yet have decided to sell their souls in return for tax cuts and deregulation.
December 29th, 2006 at 6:38 pmThe world is so exquisite, with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there’s little good evidence.
– Carl Sagan
December 29th, 2006 at 6:38 pmIf we can’t think for ourselves, if we’re unwilling to question authority, then we’re just putty in the hands of those in power. But if the citizens are educated and form their own opinions, then those in power work for us. In every country, we should be teaching our children the scientific method and the reasons for a Bill of Rights. With it comes a certain decency, humility and community spirit. In the demon-haunted world that we inhabit by virtue of being human, this may be all that stands between us and the enveloping darkness.
– Carl Sagan,
December 29th, 2006 at 6:41 pmThe suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion or in politics, but it is not the path to knowledge, and there’s no place for it in the endeavor of science.
- Carl Sagan
December 29th, 2006 at 6:43 pmSamantha – you are so right on
December 29th, 2006 at 6:48 pm“Let’s start some lawsuits” This IS a violation of church and state.
Is main stream media educatiing the public on this???? As usual NO. I’m sick to death of this thug administration pushing their crap on us and getting away with it.
It’s hard to believe that natural selection and evolution aren’t valid scientific principles. Here is the exception that proves the rule –> http://thumbsnap.com/v/6YvXAPG0.jpg
December 29th, 2006 at 6:48 pmCarl Sagan was a great man. I just got one of his books… The Demon Haunted World. Think I’ll go read it!
December 29th, 2006 at 6:55 pmYou can’t run a country on a book of religion.
Not by a smudge or a lump or a smidgon of
Foolish rules of ancient date
Designed to make you all feel great
While you bend, fold and mutilate
Those unbelievers in the neighboring state.
— Frank Zappa
December 29th, 2006 at 7:00 pmMake no mistake, the Bushies DO believe in science. They believe in science when it comes to making bigger better bombs. This however is mind-blowing:
Air Force pursuing antimatter weapons
Program was touted publicly, then came official gag order
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/10/04/MNGM393GPK1.DTL
December 29th, 2006 at 7:02 pmMan has reached the point in the human cycle of evolution where the initial method of explaining things not understood has no credibility. This initial method was to create a power that understood everything but was totally understood by man. Hence, God. When there was a phenomenon not explained by the science accepted at the time it could always be explained by the writings of “God,” The Holy Bible, the book. Since it was in the Bible there was no problem since God knows and we know God. As the cycle of evolution continued and learning increased more and more, science began to erode the position of the Bible in the understanding of the non-understandable and began to replace the dependence on God by scientific fact, not religious myth. An aside, but important to my point, is the fact that man is the only species of animal in our world that accumulates and passes on knowledge from past generations to the next. Lesser animals are able to teach and pass on to their offspring experience gained individually but not knowledge accumulated by past generations. We are now at the point where about every thing in our universe can be explained by science except one, the initial creation of life–the concept of a supreme being or creator. This conflict has totally destroyed any value of organized religion, or worship of God to explain the unknown except the accepted social values of religion as applied to societal living. This too, however, has its fallacy when the social values of a religion are used to justify unacceptable acts against other individuals (women, e. g.) or groups (Arabs vs. Jews, e. g.). The Fundamentalists refuse to accept the fact that they may be wrong, which, per se, makes no nevermind so long as they do not impact others by using power to which they have no right. The bushco are experts at this violation of our Constitution considering the separation of Church and State. The Fundamentalists believe that God exists because they know God. Scientists believe that God MAY exist because they have no way of knowing he doesn’t. I would trust a scientist long before I would believe a Fundamentalist. That is why I am an Agnostic and not a Republican.
December 29th, 2006 at 7:08 pm33, ReadyForChange… I’m rediscovering COSMOS, Carl Sagan’s brilliant series from the 70’s. They run it every Tuesday evening at 8pm CT on the Science Channel. Or you can pick it up on Amazon (or your local library?).
Not only is the series a great primer on Astronomy but Carl talks spellbindingly and passionately on the environment, animal rights, global warming and nuclear holocaust. Its actually more relevant today then it was then.
Unfortunately there are no scientists today so recognizable and respected as Sagan. Even today the neo-con smear machine wouldn’t be able to harm him.
December 29th, 2006 at 7:10 pmCarl Sagan’s “Cosmos” was one of the best things I ever saw on public television. He was a great man.
December 29th, 2006 at 7:11 pmAnd on the seventh day..he maketh it look very very old.
December 29th, 2006 at 7:15 pmOne of the most useful things about Cosmos is when he begins with his walking timeline of the age of the earth. The people who stuck this absurd religious nonsense about the canyon should be required to sit through at least the first episode of Cosmos.
December 29th, 2006 at 7:25 pmCarl Sagan’s “Cosmos†was one of the best things I ever saw on public television. He was a great man.
Comment by Bluedog49 — December 29, 2006 @ 7:11 pm
i remember those shows… agree with you also…
whenever i hear some speak of money in terms of “billions” i think of sagan and how he would say “billions and billions of stars” – and i would never have thought that money could/would ever be related in such terms, the way i think of hundreds…
December 29th, 2006 at 7:30 pm…
#39
On the eighth day man created God.
December 29th, 2006 at 7:37 pmAmericans Flunk Science Basics:
Quick: How long does it take the Earth to go around the sun?
If you answered one year, congratulations. Count yourself among America’s better-informed half. Only 47 percent of Americans correctly answered that question.
…About 20 percent think that the sun rotates around the Earth, a possibility Copernicus and Galileo supposedly buried centuries ago.
…The study found that 64 percent of Americans have no understanding of the nature of scientific inquiry.
…just 2 percent understand what a scientific theory is: an explanation of a phenomenon based on testable, repeatable and generally accepted observations.
…The latest study verifies earlier ones showing that only about 40 percent of Americans believe that humans descend from apelike ancestors. In nearly all other industrial nations, about 80 percent accept evolution as fact.
December 29th, 2006 at 7:38 pm#43
33% of the people questioned (those who supported DUHbya in any popularity poll) thought the earth rotated around an axis that entered their body through their anus, paralleled their spine, and exited through the top of their head. So much for science. Obviously their fore bearers failed to accumulate the required knowledge.
December 29th, 2006 at 7:47 pmCarl Sagan’s “Cosmos†was one of the best things I ever saw on public television. He was a great man.
Comment by Bluedog49
I loved that show. I watched it every Sunday night. I never saw the ending of a single Cosmos — Carl Sagan’s voice lulled me to sleep every time. *sigh*
December 29th, 2006 at 7:52 pmSee what you get after 30 years of attacks on public education. Over 30 years ago they decided to go after the children, and now they’ve grown up and this is the result.
December 29th, 2006 at 8:02 pm46, Zooey…If you want an instant flashback visit the Carl Sagan Portal. Give it a few seconds and the theme music starts playing. You’ll be ten years old all over again.
http://www.carlsagan.com/
December 29th, 2006 at 8:02 pmI read his last book: Millions of millions or something like that, cuz it was in spanish. He even narrates the sickness he got and all the things he went through. No doubt, he was perhaps, the greatest science-spreader in the last 3 decades. At present time, I cant think of another who equals him. I really dont know how capable he was as a scientist, but his true merit was to deliver science to each one of us in an understandable and fascinating way.
December 29th, 2006 at 8:03 pm35, from the antimater article:
December 29th, 2006 at 8:08 pm
Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you’d have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion. –Steven Weinberg, Nobel Laureate
December 29th, 2006 at 8:14 pmThere are a handful of scientists who’ve been able to cross over and become communicators to the masses. Stephen Hawking’s “A Brief History of Time” is a great book.
The absolute best science book written for the lay person I’ve read is “Deep Time” by David Darling. As much as the birth and death of the Universe is ultimately unknowable I think his explanation is a close to a bullseye as humanity will ever get. A beautiful book, and I don’t use the word beautiful often.
December 29th, 2006 at 8:15 pmLarry, thanks for the link. It was good to hear his voice again.
December 29th, 2006 at 8:18 pm50, We need an anti-George Bush and arrange for him to meet George Bush. When they shake hands they’ll annihilate each other.
December 29th, 2006 at 8:20 pm42. You read my mind! ;-)
December 29th, 2006 at 8:31 pmRather amazing, at least 5 people here, regular posters, have read or watched Carl Sagans work. I wonder how many months you’d have to wait to find five such people at Little Green Footballs (far-rightwing site)?
December 29th, 2006 at 8:31 pm#47
December 29th, 2006 at 8:36 pmSee what you get after 30 years of attacks on public education.
Isn’t that the truth! Those poorly educated, Bible-thumping, science denying fools are numerous enough now to drag the nation back a few hundred years to their level.
I shouldn’t be so surprised, but I am astonished that officials at the GC are standing for this.
#36 CtR
December 29th, 2006 at 8:38 pmGreat post!
There were re-runs of Cosmos on Discovery channel(?) recently.
December 29th, 2006 at 8:39 pmI had almost forgotten how much I admired that guy. We lost a good one when he left us.
I read and watched Carl Segan’s work. Good stuff Maynard. Beeyuns and Beeyuns of light years…
December 29th, 2006 at 8:51 pm#48 – Um, thanks Larry.
Sorry, I just fell asleep for a minute….
December 29th, 2006 at 8:55 pmA few “on-topic” jokes from George Carlin before I go:
If you ate both pasta and antipasto, would you still be hungry?
Why are hemorrhoids called “hemorrhoids” instead of “assteroids”?
A few “off-topic” from George Carlin:
Atheism is a non-prophet organization.
December 29th, 2006 at 9:22 pmWhat do you do when you see an endangered animal eating an endangered plant?
If one synchronized swimmer drowns, do the rest drown, too?
If you spin an oriental man in a circle three times does he become disoriented?
Why is there an expiration date on sour cream?
#7 – debkakes
December 29th, 2006 at 9:39 pmHats off for your comment. I’m more than a little disappointed in the misleading ‘Fox like’ title and the ‘ditto headness’ of the majority of the comments posted here.
The absolute best science book written for the lay person I’ve read is “Deep Time†by David Darling. Comment by Larry from C
I will check it out. Thanks. One of the best, funniest books about science I have read is this one.
December 29th, 2006 at 9:39 pm#1
How does one even respond to this?
I’m much too far away from the Grand Canyon visitor centers right now to be able to respond appropriately. In the meantime, somebody get these bible-thumping imbeciles out of the Dept. of the Interior. Let’s clear them out of NASA and the FDA, too, while we’re at it.
December 29th, 2006 at 9:49 pmHahaha…. next they’ll be telling me Paul Bunyan made the Great Lakes.
Screw. You. Bush.
December 29th, 2006 at 10:00 pmComment by Clyde the Ripper — December 29, 2006 @ 7:08 pm
Excellent essay. I would modify it only slightly.
The Fundamentalists believe that God exists because they have been told/brainwashed about God.
Others know that God, the Tao, the All, exists because they have personally sensed its presence/a connection.
I like this quote from Einstein:
The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description .. If there is any religion that could cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism.
December 29th, 2006 at 10:12 pmIn the Beginning, Man thought God lived in the river and the mountains and the sun and so on….each had a name and a job – very utilitarian.
Then the Jews (after Ahken-aten) came up with Montheism, saying that God was everywhere and nowhere – smart move because then God sort of moved around and had responsibility for everything, but when he appeared to be ‘off the job’ was simply ‘moving in mysterious ways’. This idea worked well, even the Christians, pulling off the remarkable theistic triple somersault of the Trinity without losing anyone (except the Copts) were able to parlay this into near world domination.
Enter Copernicus and Galileo with their “Dudes did you know the Earth is not the center of the Universe” heresy. Well pass the faggots, Torquemada, if we are not the center of God’s Universe then perhaps we are not that important to God or maybe he doesn’t exist…. can’t have that…
The comes Newton, Darwin, Einstein and Hubble and the game is up for the idea that Man is the center of anyone’s Universe, so why then is this Jesus and Mohammed thing anything but a bunch of cavemen inventing stuff to make themselves feel important…..
Agnosticism is the last stage before you figure out that God probably doesn’t exist and even if he did, he doesn’t give a sh*t about you (the tornado missed your house and hit the trailer park not because you are righteous, but that tornadoes like trailer parks)….so then why does he exist, ad nausuem….
Try it another way, do agnostics buy Lottery tickets?
December 29th, 2006 at 10:29 pmAnd BNF – that Einstein thesis is probably the only remaining logical approach for religion…..but then Einstein was still a closet atheist.
December 29th, 2006 at 10:31 pmMarie, BnF
Thanks for reading the comment.
It is somewhat difficult to deal with subjects of this nature in this forum where we are limited in time, space and research source availability. It is worth the effort, however, if a few kindred souls just acknowledge the thought. Contrary to what one may think, our comments do not have to be sarcastic one-liners but they are fun too if a troll is on the receiving end.
December 29th, 2006 at 10:39 pm#68 Terry
In my case the answer is no. But I don’t buy lottery tickets because of one of my college classes. It was a statistics class and I learned two things: the first was figuring the probability (odds) of winning which is generally astronomically against winning in the first place then consider they only offer a portion of the proceeds as prize money so you must deal with the house cut (50% +/-) and if you win you get only half of what they promised less 25% taxes or you must take your winnings over an extended period of time with no interest; the second was the possibility 50/50 (either I win or I lose) of winning but I have found that with a 50/50 chance I will be wrong 95% of the time. It may have nothing to do with God (Unless I pissed him off at some time or another) but it sure fits with Clyde’s Theory of Relativity: If I win any money my relatives will steal it.
December 29th, 2006 at 10:57 pmAnyway Clyde my point being if you have figured out why you don’t buy lottery tickets, then you have already taken the necessary steps to defacto atheism from agnosticism you just haven’t applied it yet…?
December 29th, 2006 at 11:22 pmClyde, Thinkprogress went and deleted my full explanation of why agnosticism is like having a lottery ticket in your pocket even though you know the odds are stacked way against you…
Thanks to Richard Dawkins for finally persuading me to shitcan the lottery ticket in my pocket….
December 29th, 2006 at 11:33 pmOh now it’s back – Schrodinger – hilfe mich!
December 29th, 2006 at 11:34 pmTerry,
The believer buys his ticket and prays to God for it to be a winner. When it is not he accepts God’s will.
The atheist buys his ticket and says since there is no God I do not need to pray. When he does not win he is convinced, again, that God does not exist.
The Agnostic, when he doesn’t win asks “Why?” So God says, “You have to buy a ticket, fool!”
The atheist and the believer both depend upon the same blind faith to prove their position. Neither can provide any proof for their belief nor any proof to contradict the other’s position.
The agnostic denies the faith, and anti-faith, and says “If you is there Baby, you sure got me fooled. Let me win the lottery without the ticket and I is yo’ boy!”
December 29th, 2006 at 11:41 pm#68 – Terry
Fantastic!
December 29th, 2006 at 11:41 pmThis stupidity HAS consequences. The destruction of science and science education will reduce America to a laughingstock and, ultimately, a 3rd rate has-been of a nation.
Other countries, where they can do math and physics and research WITHOUT repression to conform to religious idiocy will be the future powers. I certainly hope that we dump everyone like Bush and his anti-science thugs and save our country.
December 29th, 2006 at 11:58 pmClyde – yeah…. I was there for a long time – atheists and believers both relied on faith to ‘prove’ their behavior. However there was this major difference:
1. The atheist relies on rational thought to come to his/her conclusion, only an irrational atheist (is there one?) turns the probability that God does not exist into a faith – it denies everything made in the process that brings them there in the first place
December 30th, 2006 at 12:08 am2. The atheist never acts on that ‘blind faith’ – he she continues to be governed by the acquired morality of experience in the community they live in what ever that is and the rationality of thought, even if that can be perverse or misplaced. You never hear the words “My faith told me to smite Saddam, so I did” or “My faith told me I should be president” from an atheist. Atheists are rational beings, the root of a religious believer tells them to be fundamentally irrational at the start…
Publicus, imagine if the line between what science could do and what it could not had been drawn not in 2005, but in 1905:
1. No relativity, no quantum theory (no nukes but then no computers, no moonshot…..), no antibiotics, no DNA,
1805:
2. No electrical power – none, nothing, no cure for smallpox etc
1705:
3. No steam engines, no ship’s clocks…
1605:
4. Well we’re still shoving flowers up our noses for the pox and setting fire to our grannies and besides the sun is still the center of the Universe – no Newton’s Laws of Motion…. too much material
I think any state that removes Darwin from the curriculum should be banned from sending high schoolers to study science out of state…
December 30th, 2006 at 12:52 amUrban legend sheeple. Just ‘cuz it was on Alternet don’t make it true. Let’s not do Chimp & right wing nutjob imitations, eh?
December 30th, 2006 at 2:33 amWhat?! No trolls to defend this one?! Where are you, Kevin, joeslogic, Tracy, MA, happyguy, Exley, Jason MH, etc., when the Busheviks really need you?
December 30th, 2006 at 2:46 amIn unrelated news, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) has begun modifying their website, distributing pamphlets, to offer the following alternative explanation about the fossil record: Dinosaurs fossils are not millions of years old, as previously stated, but some 6,000 years old and the dinosaurs’ extinction was due to the global flood.
There was no room for them in the arch.
/sarcasm off
December 30th, 2006 at 3:13 amI meant “the ark”
sshheeesss….
December 30th, 2006 at 3:15 amYikes! I meant “the ark“.
December 30th, 2006 at 3:16 amGregor,
December 30th, 2006 at 3:48 amDon’t worry. Considering what you’re sarcastically quoting from, correct spelling really isn’t necessary here.
This is old news – over a year. Also, the initial premis about commenting on the age is false. Here is a FAQ from the NPS website:
How old is the Canyon?
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.
December 30th, 2006 at 8:02 amhttp://www.nps.gov/grca/faqs.htm#old
How old is the Canyon?
Comment by Jim Horv
From Abraham’s birth to Noah’s grandson (Shem’s son), Arpachshad’s birth, 2 years after the Flood started, was 290 years (Gen. 11:11-26), this places the onset of the Flood at around 2331 B.C. [definitely 4,300-4,400 years ago].
The genealogy of Genesis 5:3-32 precludes any gaps due to its tight chronological structure and gives us 1,656 years between Creation and the Flood. Therefore, the biblical age of the Grand Canton is 4,344 years!!
Of course, that is using the hocus-pocus science of the religious zealots, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and those other zealots at http://www.creationevidence.org at who use Scripture itself as a guide instead of common sense and scientific evidence. And we can now incude the dipshit administrators in the Bush Administration to that vast body of scientists as well.
O
December 30th, 2006 at 8:31 amComment by Lora
You just got your response from Jim. I suppose he was too busy trying to derail the thread over at Huffingtonpost to come here before now.
December 30th, 2006 at 8:48 amI just visited the web site and here’s a quote from
http://www.nps.gov/grca/planyourvisit/ranger-program.htm
Did You Know?
The more recent Kaibab limestone caprock, on the rims of the Grand Canyon, formed 270 million years ago. In contrast, the oldest rocks within the Inner Gorge at the bottom of Grand Canyon date to 1.84 billion years ago. Geologists currently set the age of Earth at 4.5 billion years.
So even though there’s a biblical anti science book in the book store, the web site is at least still acknowledging real geologic science…
December 30th, 2006 at 9:34 amRe: my previous comment.
December 30th, 2006 at 9:40 amNot trying to justify the BS, just an observation. These Xian fundies have this need for Indigestible Design to be inculcated everywhere…
This list of inanimate thinkers shows the gullibility of the lazy Left of our society. Without checking facts or knowing any truth about which is lie and which is truth, or the source of the original post, all this hate and empty claims pour forth.
1,000 years from now, you will all wish you checked for facts.
December 30th, 2006 at 9:55 am[...] From Think Progress blog in the USA: Grand Canyon National Park is not permitted to give an official estimate of the geologic age of its principal feature, due to pressure from Bush administration appointees. [...]
December 30th, 2006 at 10:08 amNoahs Arc was originally An Old Hindu Story adopted by the west , They also had immaculate births in the Hindu Gods long Before christ was an itch In Josephs pocket
December 30th, 2006 at 10:48 amJeez folks, this is from 2004!
December 30th, 2006 at 11:24 amhttp://www.time.com/time/columnist/jaroff/article/0,9565,783829,00.html
And it is NON-NEWS!
It’s one damn book. And it has every right to be sold wherever someone wants to sell it.
We have so much more to be upset about. But everyone loves a chance to bash Bush (rightfully) and Christians (whom you all seem to think exist in one big category).
As a liberal, and a thinking Christian, I grow weary of the lock-step thinking I see in liberal blogs.
If we don’t start using our brains and thinking for ourselves, instead of being led, we will be no better than those we villify.
In addition, from what I understand, Park Service employees are not discouraged from stating geologic facts, but from telling someone who tries to argue Creationism with them that they are full of shit. Essentially. And frankly, I see nothing wrong with THAT either — it is outside their area of expertise, and is engaging in a discussion that can become personal and offensive to a Park guest. It is more an exercise in etiquette than some vast conspiracy to silence Science.
December 30th, 2006 at 11:35 amHi debkakes, you do not have to say “shit” to state politely but firmly that creationism is wrong, as shown by scientific research on the Grand Canyon and many other subjects. No, not all park rangers have degrees in geology. Neither do guides in the Anne Frank House in Amsterdam all have PhD’s in World War II history. But I think they should be fully entitled to say to a Holocaust denialist visitor that he is extremely wrong (and I’d say ‘full of shit’ as well ;))
December 30th, 2006 at 11:50 amI hate to break it to the fundie nutcases (and their pigeon of a so-called president), but the Grand Canyon has been around longer than all organized religions in the history of mankind, and will be here long after they’re all gone!
December 30th, 2006 at 11:52 amThe canyon is one day older today.
December 30th, 2006 at 11:55 amI’m so disgusted, I have no clue where to begin.
December 30th, 2006 at 12:00 pmWorst “creation” of human beings in the entire history of the world = organized religion…
December 30th, 2006 at 12:14 pmI hope sincerely it is fake. The website states the following:
December 30th, 2006 at 12:33 pmhttp://www.nps.gov/grca/faqs.htm#old
The canyon is one day older today.
Comment by ForTruth — December 30, 2006 @ 11:55 am
heh… another classic fortruther…
December 30th, 2006 at 12:35 pmfrom the link provided by emily:
The oldest rocks at the canyon bottom are close to 2000 million years old.
numbers give me a headache… but isn’t “2000 million” the same thing as “2 Billion” ?
December 30th, 2006 at 12:44 pmugh… it’s starting already…
I was just there a couple of months ago, and I assure you that there are plenty of books for sale that say what you want them to say. In fact, I never even saw the book that is the subject of this controversy. To believe that the Grand Canyon employees have been silenced is a distortion of the truth. They are park rangers–not scientists or geologists. They are not authorities on how the canyon was formed. However, they are still at liberty to say, “Geologists believe this” or “Scientists believe that”. I have been going to the Grand Canyon every year for the past 22 years, and I have never heard a park ranger or a tour guide ever mention anything about creation.
December 30th, 2006 at 12:48 pmI hate to break it to the fundie nutcases (and their pigeon of a so-called president), but the Grand Canyon has been around longer than all organized religions in the history of mankind, and will be here long after they’re all gone!
Comment by Lee — December 30, 2006 @ 11:52 am
You should also let all of those scientists and geologists know too. The canyon has been around even longer than their so-called theories and explanations.
December 30th, 2006 at 1:20 pmStuMarks in #94 very nicely illustrates why I think early indoctrination into church dogma is a form of child abuse. Isn’t he just sweet?
December 30th, 2006 at 1:26 pm20wordsorless: “I have been going to the Grand Canyon every year for the past 22 years, and I have never heard a park ranger or a tour guide ever mention anything about creation.”
Good. Glad to hear that and thanks. I would hate to think the Forest Service is run by religious fanatics.
December 30th, 2006 at 1:28 pmI have a confession to make.
December 30th, 2006 at 2:40 pmI did it.
Last year, when I spent my average tourist visit of 10 minutes at the south rim scenic pullout.
Yeah, this sounds like urban legend to me. There’s a comprehensive discussion of the geology including ages on the Park website here:
December 30th, 2006 at 4:37 pmhttp://www.nps.gov/grca/planyourvisit/loader.cfm?url=/commonspot/security/getfile.cfm&PageID=114977
[...] Meta gripe — in the tipping of hats to where the story was found (ThinkProgress for me), each story only links one step closer to the story at PEER. I highly recommend reading the root story. it’s got great quotes. [...]
December 30th, 2006 at 4:38 pmOn the other hand, the article from PEER is pretty clear…
December 30th, 2006 at 4:41 pmhttp://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=801
Bush: “Grand Canyon Formed By Noah’s Ark”
In another environmental set back President George W. Bush has ordered Grand Canyon National Park to stop estimating the age of the slopes because right wing evangelicals are offended easily by the knowledge others gain in their elementary school classrooms, park signs that claim that the canyon was formed by erosion over millions of years are to be replaced with signs saying “Noah Was Here.”
President Bush justified his power trip in an address to the American people.
“Good evening, and welcome to The Grand Canyon, the only monument on earth formed by Noah’s ark. Now you all may live on this planet. I say you may live on earth because I am trying to garner to votes of illegal aliens. Take me to your leader. If you live on this earth, you need to know how it was created.”
The president took out legos that had been built to resemble an ark, then took out plastic animals.
“This is a pig. It goes moo,” said that president, “and it was on Noah’s ark. Now normally the ark would have crashed against the walls of the canyon, breaking the ship faster than my approval rating dips. But because Noah strapped live pigs to the front as a buffer, the ark was saved and the canyon formed. Any questions?”
Every journalist raised their hands and began screaming at the president. The president look a question from a reporter who looked like Jeff Gannon with a beard. The nameless reporter asked, “how do you work with scientists who have distanced themselves from God forever separating themselves from salvation?”
“That’s a very good question,” the president replied, “and I do not have all the answers. But God does and that is why He forged his canyon using Noah’s ark and if you believe in teaching both sides of the issue to park visitors than you are insane. I mean, why teach both sides of an issue when mine is obviously the correct one? I’m the decider.”
Scientists are frustrated that President Bush continues to ignore reality. The Union of Concerned Scientists released a statement saying that they hope that the parks service will recover after President Bush is booed out of office on his last day, but the president sees his moral forests initiative lasting for years to come. He assures his ever shrinking base that, “soon we will be distributing broachers to Columbia Gorge that say the land was not shaped by boulders caught in a flood but from magical Jesus pixies.”
President Bush is expected to announce his plan for a Free National Health Care System, in which Jesus comes back from the dead and heals you.
December 30th, 2006 at 5:09 pm[...] Please find story and links here. [...]
December 30th, 2006 at 11:08 pm[...] Please find story and links here. [...]
December 31st, 2006 at 9:49 pmOk, you idiotic righties. This is NOT from 2004. This is the the Park Service having an official policy of “no comment” to the question of ‘How old is the Grand Canyon’. They cannot state that it is millions of years old because that might offend YOU, who thinks it is 6000 years old. I am not so polite. You are a total idiot if you think it is the result of the Noah’s Ark flood. Erosion doesn’t happen in the blink of an eye.
December 31st, 2006 at 10:03 pm[...] Please find story and links here. [...]
December 31st, 2006 at 10:27 pmOkay – this IS troubling but I’m not sure it’s such a story yet. go to the Grand Canyon NPS webpage – says the Canyon is 6 million years old; human remains date back something like 18,000 years, etc. One book by one moron — bought by morons — is a storm in a teacup. aren’t we giving it more press and attention than it deserves?
January 1st, 2007 at 2:01 pmNo, Kerris.
Grand Canyon National Park is not permitted to give an official estimate of the geologic age of its principal feature, due to pressure from Bush administration appointees.
January 1st, 2007 at 8:32 pm“And on the seventh day..he maketh it look very very old. ”
Comment by keepinon
That’s one of the most hilarious things I have read all week. Thanks for the laugh.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:09 amAge of the Grand Canyon by National Park Service
January 4th, 2007 at 3:35 pmwhy is the grand canyon so important
January 9th, 2007 at 5:48 amhttp://www.seattlest.com/archives/2007/01/03/mea_culpa_mostly.php
http://www.connectsavannah.com/show_article.php?article_id=1770
Sorry to burst bubbles, but they’re not really required to lie (or not comment) about the age.
January 13th, 2007 at 8:05 amhttp://www.connectsavannah.com/show_article.php?article_id=1770
http://www.seattlest.com/archives/2007/01/03/mea_culpa_mostly.php
The controversy goes beyond the book. The nonprofit Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility noted in a Dec. 28 letter that when the Grand Canyon superintendent faces inquiries on the geologic age of the canyon, he refers the issue to Washington headquarters. Park rangers faced with questions from visitors to the park are left to flounder. There’s no official guidance on how to deal with creationist claims or the geologic age of the canyon.
Bomar, the park service director, can fix this easily and quickly: Remove the book from sale from within the park; its proper place is for sale in private bookstores outside the public park. Equally important, finish the long-delayed pamphlet “National Park Service Geologic Interpretive Program: Distinguishing Science from Religion” and distribute it to park rangers. The nation’s public parks are not the place to promote religious theories about the formation and development of Earth.
January 13th, 2007 at 8:08 amPS: sorry, those last two paragraphs were from a third site, http://www.modbee.com/24hour/opinions/story/3463827p-12675749c.html which also explains that there is no official requirement for park personel not to dislose the real age. instead, most of the outcry from peer is because rangers don’t have an official pamphlet on how to deal with hardcore creationists and explain reality to them.
January 13th, 2007 at 8:11 am