Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NPR)   In what's been a long-standing battle, some scientists have always believed the Grand Canyon is very, very old. Others believe it's quite young. Now new evidence shows they both might be right. See, creationists and evolutionists? You can get along   (npr.org ) divider line
    More: Cool, Grand Canyon, University of New Mexico, Nature Geoscience  
•       •       •

5827 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Jan 2014 at 10:25 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



71 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2014-01-29 08:57:18 AM  
Teach the controversy!

i522.photobucket.com
 
2014-01-29 08:59:07 AM  
Either way, like subby's mom, it's still a good crack.
 
2014-01-29 09:11:30 AM  

dittybopper: Either way, like subby's mom, it's still a good crack.


www.thestar.com

Go on...
 
2014-01-29 09:19:47 AM  
Geologists: Disagreeing on the interpretation of scientific data.
Creationists: Pulling shiat out of their asses and pretending it's scientific data.

IT'S EXACTLY THE SAME!11!
 
2014-01-29 10:28:56 AM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-01-29 10:31:23 AM  
Noah's flood carved it out 4,000 years ago, and drowned the dinosaurs.

/except the ones Jeebus rode to work
//ever tried to change lanes on a T-Rex?
 
2014-01-29 10:32:57 AM  
This actually has nothing to do with Creationism anyway, since the "young" model of the Canyon is 6 MILLION years, not 6.000.

And the "Colorado River did it" is just the simplified thing they teach you in grade school anyway, it's much more complex than that and they know it. Earthquakes, rockslides and frost heave do just as much to mold the Canyon as the river, and they've known this for years, so I'm not really sure what the "new" data is here...
 
2014-01-29 10:35:08 AM  
Consensus is so easy with the goal posts mounted on wheels.
You know who else,,,,
 
2014-01-29 10:35:34 AM  
i62.tinypic.com
 
2014-01-29 10:35:36 AM  
I think Family Circus tackled this debate about 30 years ago.
 
2014-01-29 10:38:06 AM  
My guess is it started on a fault line and grew from there. Or it grew and found a fault line and grew from there.
 
2014-01-29 10:38:08 AM  
This has nothing to do with evolution. Geology is not Biology.
Creationists mix biological and geological origins together, scientists don't.
 
2014-01-29 10:41:00 AM  
Uh, no, subby, just no. That's not how it works.

Case A:
Researcher 1: "I think it's 1000." [shows research]
Researcher 2: "I think it's 10000" [shows research]
Researcher 3: "I think it's 4500." [shows research]

Case B:
Millenia-old social/philosophy book: "It is 100."
Researcher 1: "I think it's 10000" [shows research]
Researcher 2: "I think it's 10000" [shows research]
Researcher 3: "I think it's 4500." [shows research]
Subby: "SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RESEARCH AND BOOK"
 
2014-01-29 10:41:01 AM  
What a silly argument.  Every body knows that the Grand Canyon was created when Paul Bunyan's ox Babe dragged Paul's peavy behind him.
 
2014-01-29 10:41:45 AM  
Subby sounds as dumb as the creatards.
 
2014-01-29 10:42:39 AM  

TheShavingofOccam123: My guess is it started on a fault line and grew from there. Or it grew and found a fault line and grew from there.


Yes, and occasioally there was heavy flooding, sayof a sea draining of ice sheet meltig, that caused rapid erosio, then slow erosion, then another event causing rapid erosion etc.

If you look at a lot of the terrain out west, it was formed by rapid processes.
 
2014-01-29 10:42:55 AM  

Mr. Right: What a silly argument.  Every body knows that the Grand Canyon was created when Paul Bunyan's ox Babe dragged Paul's peavy behind him.


...Paul's what?
 
2014-01-29 10:44:40 AM  
6 million is the new 20
 
2014-01-29 10:45:31 AM  
See, I'm a catholic. So I believe that God's hand guides evolution. So I can look down on both people. I'm not a retarded anti-science creationist, and I'm not a fedora tipping hell-bound athiest :)
 
2014-01-29 10:47:02 AM  

cretinbob: TheShavingofOccam123: My guess is it started on a fault line and grew from there. Or it grew and found a fault line and grew from there.

Yes, and occasioally there was heavy flooding, sayof a sea draining of ice sheet meltig, that caused rapid erosio, then slow erosion, then another event causing rapid erosion etc.

If you look at a lot of the terrain out west, it was formed by rapid processes.


Erosion is the tinfoil hat geologists use to keep catastrophism out of their brains.

/member of a uniformitarianism group myself
 
2014-01-29 10:47:39 AM  

Bondith: Mr. Right: What a silly argument.  Every body knows that the Grand Canyon was created when Paul Bunyan's ox Babe dragged Paul's peavy behind him.

...Paul's what?


I think he meant Stratocaster.
 
2014-01-29 10:47:54 AM  

Bondith: Mr. Right: What a silly argument.  Every body knows that the Grand Canyon was created when Paul Bunyan's ox Babe dragged Paul's peavy behind him.

...Paul's what?


sorry.  misspelled it.  His peavey.  It's a logging tool with a long wooden handle and a hook on it that is used to turn logs.  It was used when men were men and logging was done with axes, two-man saws, wedges, cant hooks, horses, oxen, log chains and peavies.
 
2014-01-29 10:48:48 AM  

Mikey1969: This actually has nothing to do with Creationism anyway, since the "young" model of the Canyon is 6 MILLION years, not 6.000.

And the "Colorado River did it" is just the simplified thing they teach you in grade school anyway, it's much more complex than that and they know it. Earthquakes, rockslides and frost heave do just as much to mold the Canyon as the river, and they've known this for years, so I'm not really sure what the "new" data is here...


Kinda like the simplified atom model resembling the solar system.
 
2014-01-29 10:51:26 AM  

TheShavingofOccam123: My guess is it started on a fault line and grew from there. Or it grew and found a fault line and grew from there.


We were wondering if you were going to weigh in on this or not.
 
2014-01-29 10:51:33 AM  
Ah, the old "Maybe Yes, Then Again, Maybe No" theory.
 
2014-01-29 10:51:36 AM  
If scientists cannot agree whether the Canyon is seventy million ears old or six million years old, then clearly scientists cannot determine the age of anything at all and the earth is actually only six-thousand years old.
 
2014-01-29 10:52:50 AM  

Mr. Right: Bondith: Mr. Right: What a silly argument.  Every body knows that the Grand Canyon was created when Paul Bunyan's ox Babe dragged Paul's peavy behind him.

...Paul's what?

sorry.  misspelled it.  His peavey.  It's a logging tool with a long wooden handle and a hook on it that is used to turn logs.  It was used when men were men and logging was done with axes, two-man saws, wedges, cant hooks, horses, oxen, log chains and peavies.


Ahhh, OK, that makes sense.

Also, I'm so used to Fark asshattery that it took me a minute to recognise an honest, helpful response for what it was.
 
2014-01-29 10:56:11 AM  

Mr. Right: Bondith: Mr. Right: What a silly argument.  Every body knows that the Grand Canyon was created when Paul Bunyan's ox Babe dragged Paul's peavy behind him.

...Paul's what?

sorry.  misspelled it.  His peavey.  It's a logging tool with a long wooden handle and a hook on it that is used to turn logs.  It was used when men were men and logging was done with axes, two-man saws, wedges, cant hooks, horses, oxen, log chains and peavies.


No, Peavey is an amplifier. For his Stratocaster axe.
 
2014-01-29 10:56:17 AM  

SonOfSpam: Bondith: Mr. Right: What a silly argument.  Every body knows that the Grand Canyon was created when Paul Bunyan's ox Babe dragged Paul's peavy behind him.

...Paul's what?

I think he meant Stratocaster.


With a whammy bar?
 
2014-01-29 10:57:27 AM  
Cosmically the whole planet is young.
 
2014-01-29 10:59:16 AM  
6 and 70 million years old is still a far cry from Sunday, October 23, 4004 BC ('first day of creation').

/ uniformitarianism vs. catastrophism debates rock!
 
2014-01-29 11:01:54 AM  

Mikey1969: This actually has nothing to do with Creationism anyway, since the "young" model of the Canyon is 6 MILLION years, not 6.000.

And the "Colorado River did it" is just the simplified thing they teach you in grade school anyway, it's much more complex than that and they know it. Earthquakes, rockslides and frost heave do just as much to mold the Canyon as the river, and they've known this for years, so I'm not really sure what the "new" data is here...


Yeah, it works perfect for school kids, but geologists have known that it is much more complicated for years. Except for this guy, apparently.
 
2014-01-29 11:04:19 AM  
Well, the whole thing was exacerbated by some young'un playin' with the hose.
 
2014-01-29 11:04:43 AM  

trappedspirit: TheShavingofOccam123: My guess is it started on a fault line and grew from there. Or it grew and found a fault line and grew from there.

We were wondering if you were going to weigh in on this or not.


"weigh in" is such a powerful term to describe my wishy-washy, non-committal, I-don't-know-what-do-you-guys-think input.

However I will post these pics of enormous current ripples formed when a giant ice dam gave way

4.bp.blogspot.com

Those are some pretty big features
 
2014-01-29 11:05:35 AM  
"Evolutionist" isn't a thing. There are creationists... and people who understand and accept scientific facts.
 
2014-01-29 11:06:05 AM  

Frank N Stein: See, I'm a catholic. So I believe that God's hand guides evolution. So I can look down on both people. I'm not a retarded anti-science creationist, and I'm not a fedora tipping hell-bound athiest :)


https://xkcd.com/774/

(Should be Fark's motto.)
 
2014-01-29 11:07:55 AM  

Bondith: Also, I'm so used to Fark asshattery that it took me a minute to recognise an honest, helpful response for what it was.


You just can't argue with facts.  I read it in the school library.  Back in about 3rd grade.  The school library must be even more reliable and factual than the internet!  After all, school libraries existed long before the internet - they were around even before we knew how to lie or troll.  Or before hyperbole was invented.  We all know that Paul Bunyan was real - there are even statues of him in Oregaon and MInnisota and other places.  All those people couldn't be wrong.
 
2014-01-29 11:13:56 AM  
FTA:

"And all of this is exciting for a scientist, Karlstrom says. "It's spectacular. If you're willing to change your mind based on evidence, it's great fun.""

I like this guy!  He's one of the guys instrumental in the "Trail of Time", so he has some professional pride on the line, and here he is saying "Whoa! I was wrong.  This new info is pretty neat, though - let's check it out."
 
2014-01-29 11:17:26 AM  
Fark it. throw it out there and see what catches: covalent bonds.
 
2014-01-29 11:19:02 AM  
It makes sense, and why not? As our sciencing gets better our theories change.

Also, it would help explain some of the awesome caves in the canyon walls.
 
2014-01-29 11:25:01 AM  

Mr. Right: What a silly argument.  Every body knows that the Grand Canyon was created when Paul Bunyan's ox Babe dragged Paul's peavy behind him.


Bullshiat. I just drove by them both yesterday. For the eight thousandth time. They still say "Hi". http://www.treesofmystery.net/
 
2014-01-29 11:29:12 AM  
Am I the only one who read the headline and DIDN'T come away w/ the impression that subby was trying to actually draw a parallel between geological dispute and creationism/evolution debate?

That is was a joke?

Have some of you folk been cooped up too long by the recent polar vortexes and global warming effects?

/what if there were no hypothetical questions?
//or snark?
///or hypothermic questions? that'd be cool, right?
 
2014-01-29 11:40:21 AM  

TheShavingofOccam123: trappedspirit: TheShavingofOccam123: My guess is it started on a fault line and grew from there. Or it grew and found a fault line and grew from there.

We were wondering if you were going to weigh in on this or not.

"weigh in" is such a powerful term to describe my wishy-washy, non-committal, I-don't-know-what-do-you-guys-think input.

However I will post these pics of enormous current ripples formed when a giant ice dam gave way

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 700x377]


carved from the missoula ice flow if my school learnin' was accurate - too lazy to wiki

Those are some pretty big features

was hoping for more pics of neat geology / interesting landscapes

so here's my contribution: the columbia river gorge
media-2.web.britannica.com
 
2014-01-29 11:41:49 AM  
hmm - fark ate my explanation for it - as i was learned long ago in school, this was formed from the missoula ice flow a ga gillion years ago.

allegedly

or jesus
 
2014-01-29 11:45:04 AM  

Mr. Right: Bondith: Also, I'm so used to Fark asshattery that it took me a minute to recognise an honest, helpful response for what it was.

You just can't argue with facts.  I read it in the school library.  Back in about 3rd grade.  The school library must be even more reliable and factual than the internet!  After all, school libraries existed long before the internet - they were around even before we knew how to lie or troll.  Or before hyperbole was invented.  We all know that Paul Bunyan was real - there are even statues of him in Oregaon and MInnisota and other places.  All those people couldn't be wrong.


That's better.
 
2014-01-29 11:49:33 AM  

Billy Liar: Well, the whole thing was exacerbated by some young'un playin' with the hose.


Makes my day!
 
2014-01-29 11:50:08 AM  
we will all know the answer, in the sweet bye and bye.
 
2014-01-29 11:51:56 AM  
24.media.tumblr.com
 
2014-01-29 11:53:18 AM  
Didn't read the article, but isn't it likely to be a combination.  A slow process that has periods of intense and accelerated change as portions reach critical mass over time?
 
2014-01-29 11:54:46 AM  
It was me who crafted the Grand Canyon, out of the living rock!.
 
2014-01-29 12:06:19 PM  
so, wait, Paris Hilton is how old?
 
2014-01-29 12:07:37 PM  

Frank N Stein: See, I'm a catholic. So I believe that God's hand guides evolution. So I can look down on both people. I'm not a retarded anti-science creationist, and I'm not a fedora tipping hell-bound athiest :)


This is the game that religious people play. Their book makes a claim about the origins of life on earth (for example in Genesis) and when this is found to be inaccurate they tell you that it wasn't meant to be taken literally. Even worse, when scientific discoveries are made, then these same people will tell you, "That's how God did it." The obvious problem is that all of these mechanics work perfectly well without an assumption of a God.

How anyone can identify as a Catholic defies reason. That church matches the definition of organized crime.
 
2014-01-29 12:10:53 PM  

Sapper_Topo: [img.fark.net image 240x210]


assets.amuniversal.com
 
2014-01-29 12:11:27 PM  

Langdon Alger: so, wait, Paris Hilton is how old?


w/w/o the recent work?
 
2014-01-29 12:20:15 PM  
I'da thunk they'd have figured all this out already.
 
2014-01-29 12:24:52 PM  
hey gaiz whats this th++++ carrier lost +++++
 
2014-01-29 12:26:28 PM  

Frank N Stein: See, I'm a catholic. So I believe that God's hand guides evolution. So I can look down on both people. I'm not a retarded anti-science creationist, and I'm not a fedora tipping hell-bound athiest :)



At least you've found a way to feel superior to both groups.
 
2014-01-29 12:38:30 PM  

Civchic: I like this guy! He's one of the guys instrumental in the "Trail of Time", so he has some professional pride on the line, and here he is saying "Whoa! I was wrong. This new info is pretty neat, though - let's check it out."


This is how scientists think and how everyone should.

You find truth in doubt
 
2014-01-29 12:39:35 PM  

cynicalbastard: Frank N Stein: See, I'm a catholic. So I believe that God's hand guides evolution. So I can look down on both people. I'm not a retarded anti-science creationist, and I'm not a fedora tipping hell-bound athiest :)


At least you've found a way to feel superior to both groups.


low fruit
not even hanging, on the ground, like acorns
 
2014-01-29 01:06:53 PM  

Frank N Stein: See, I'm a catholic. So I believe that God's hand guides evolution. So I can look down on both people. I'm not a retarded anti-science creationist, and I'm not a fedora tipping hell-bound athiest :)


Now I want a fedora so I can tip my hat :/
 
2014-01-29 01:13:09 PM  

talkertopc: This has nothing to do with evolution. Geology is not Biology.
Creationists mix biological and geological origins together, scientists don't.


Actually, the geology of the Grand Canyon has quite a bit to do with our understanding of biology and evolution, in terms of recording the geologic column and lifeforms contained therein, not to mention climate conditions and worldwide volcanic events which have influenced the course of evolution.
 
2014-01-29 01:48:03 PM  

tylerdurden217: Frank N Stein: See, I'm a catholic. So I believe that God's hand guides evolution. So I can look down on both people. I'm not a retarded anti-science creationist, and I'm not a fedora tipping hell-bound athiest :)

This is the game that religious people play. Their book makes a claim about the origins of life on earth (for example in Genesis) and when this is found to be inaccurate they tell you that it wasn't meant to be taken literally. Even worse, when scientific discoveries are made, then these same people will tell you, "That's how God did it." The obvious problem is that all of these mechanics work perfectly well without an assumption of a God.

How anyone can identify as a Catholic defies reason. That church matches the definition of organized crime.


*tips fedora*
 
2014-01-29 01:52:34 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2014-01-29 01:57:52 PM  

Frank N Stein: See, I'm a catholic. So I believe that God's hand guides evolution. So I can look down on both people. I'm not a retarded anti-science creationist, and I'm not a fedora tipping hell-bound athiest :)


Sorry, but Egyptian Coptic is the one true religion. You're going to hell like most everyone else also.
 
2014-01-29 02:25:39 PM  
2.bp.blogspot.com
Looks old.
 
2014-01-29 06:02:47 PM  

cretinbob: TheShavingofOccam123: My guess is it started on a fault line and grew from there. Or it grew and found a fault line and grew from there.

Yes, and occasioally there was heavy flooding, sayof a sea draining of ice sheet meltig, that caused rapid erosio, then slow erosion, then another event causing rapid erosion etc.

If you look at a lot of the terrain out west, it was formed by rapid processes.


I assume that you are on a cell phone from the spelling, but yes. That theory (called the Breached dam Theory) has a lot of recently discovered evidence too. And there is precedent for rapid geological sculpting in well documented cases in the form of the Missoula Floods .
 
2014-01-29 09:21:11 PM  

2KanZam: Civchic: I like this guy! He's one of the guys instrumental in the "Trail of Time", so he has some professional pride on the line, and here he is saying "Whoa! I was wrong. This new info is pretty neat, though - let's check it out."

This is how scientists think and how everyone should.

You find truth in doubt


Late to the party, but I have to say this is BS. The article claims there was consensus in 2012, and this is different from the consensus. So this guy is just a denier and needs to be shunned. There is consensus. The debate is over.

I mean, that is how science is done, right?
 
2014-01-29 09:42:27 PM  

washington-babylon: cretinbob: TheShavingofOccam123: My guess is it started on a fault line and grew from there. Or it grew and found a fault line and grew from there.

Yes, and occasioally there was heavy flooding, sayof a sea draining of ice sheet meltig, that caused rapid erosio, then slow erosion, then another event causing rapid erosion etc.

If you look at a lot of the terrain out west, it was formed by rapid processes.

I assume that you are on a cell phone from the spelling, but yes. That theory (called the Breached dam Theory) has a lot of recently discovered evidence too. And there is precedent for rapid geological sculpting in well documented cases in the form of the Missoula Floods .


Yes, I have a bad "N" key. sometimes I catch it, sometimes ot.
 
2014-01-30 01:39:49 AM  
Um. Uh. Miss Hoover?

It's a continuing process. Canyon formation isn't a one-off event so it doesn't have an age.
 
2014-01-30 01:40:58 AM  
Also,

"And all of this is exciting for a scientist, Karlstrom says. "It's spectacular. If you're willing to change your mind based on evidence, it's great fun.""

Yes scientistical person, that's called SCIENCE :/
 
2014-01-30 08:48:57 AM  
Kinda reminds me of how the Niagara River may be working its way back through an old buried gorge... I'd have to do some fact-checking before I could give the whole story.

\also, 'The Great Unconformity' is going to be the title of my solo album, which I will play on my Peavey amp.
 
Displayed 71 of 71 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report