A Paradigm Question
Look at the Grand Canyon.
Do you think it was created slowly or rapidly?
Most say slowly.
That’s what we were taught.
Ok.
If it was created slowly, does this mean the Colorado River as it exists now has always looked the same?
If so, isn’t it a little narrow to have affected the walls of the canyon that are miles and miles apart?
In other words, is the creation of the Grand Canyon a slow natural process over millions of years or is it better explained by violent forces over a shorter amount of time?
How much time?
That would probably depend on how violent the process was when it happened.
What happens to the land downstream of a catastrophic dam break?
What happened to the land below Mt. St. Helens after it erupted back in 1980?
The reason I have titled this a paradigm question is the fact that it is necessary to give up certain very established beliefs in order to consider what should be obvious just looking at existing evidence.
This, frankly, is what science requires.
It is the discipline of not jumping to conclusions.
One last question about the Grand Canyon.
If it is the result of slow erosion over millions of years, then why is it so unique?
Why don’t we see similar displays all over the world?
Conclusion
Sometimes what happened in the past can’t be explained by looking at life processes as they currently exist.