What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Do you believe the 2012 Mayan Prophecy? view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - The Mayan Calendar predicts the end of time: 2012. See the trailer for 2012, opening November 13.
80 Comments
- SaintDogbert, on 04/13/2008, -13/+105La, la, la, 6000 years old, 6000 years old, la, la, la, I'm not listening to you, I'm not listening to you.
- UtahApocalyse, on 04/13/2008, -0/+19Can we just enjoy the view?
- srdine, on 04/13/2008, -9/+24Yea! clearly it takes 4 days and a magic flood from the invisible dude in the sky.
- cheezintern, on 04/13/2008, -4/+15Any logical person can clearly see that. Don't forget the talking snake.
- tmyprod, on 04/13/2008, -0/+11Umm, I'm no scientist, but isn't the Grand Canyon in Arizona?
- inactive, on 04/13/2008, -4/+13Bwahahahah. Oh, you're serious. That's sad. I'm sorry for laughing, you're probably mentally challenged. = (
- harmonik, on 04/13/2008, -1/+10ESPECIALLY the talking snake!
Also, don't forget about all those mythological creatures without fossil records.. - rangermatt, on 04/14/2008, -0/+8I'm a park ranger (not at the Grand Canyon), and I've given geology programs in other parks (Yosemite and Sequoia-Kings Canyon). There were no regulations at my parks about giving accurate geologic dates, although we were encouraged to avoid calling them "facts" and instead preface dates with statements like "Scientists agree that..."
So yeah, I told people that Yosemite's Valley's formation began 200 million years go when volcanoes existed there. Take that, Grand Canyon! - aerovolce, on 04/13/2008, -2/+9Wow, I just went up to Grand Canyon last weekend. It doesn't really matter how old is it, just enjoy its beauty. I was amazed by the place. Great scenery, makes u think of how much of the world you've been missing. If you want, here are some pictures I took http://flickr.com/photos/aerovolce/sets/7215760444 ...
Really amazing stuff, you should visit it one day. - rangermatt, on 04/14/2008, -1/+8Jimmy, cvindustries is not dugg down for presenting "actual science," but for being a condescending pedantic jerk. Imagine if you say "sunrise is at 6am," and then I say "Actually, if you knew much about science you'd know the sun doesn't rise and set but it's actually the rotation of the earth."
And Jimmy, if you're really interested in learning about actual science, I suggest you buy a geology textbook. Your previous comments in this thread indicate you believe the Grand Canyon was formed a few thousand years ago, which is not "actual science" (your words). You asked how a river could cut through the Colorado Plateau, but if you were REALLY curious, you could look it up in any number of hundreds of geology texts or web sites. However, if you're only interested in dishonest, cherry-picked propaganda, you might want to look at the Answers in Genesis web site.
But seriously, if you want to have a REAL discussion on Grand Canyon geology, send me a shout and we'll talk about it. If you're really interested in the "physics and chemistry" of it (not to mention geology and paleontology), I'm sure you'd love to discuss both sides of the issue with me. - inactive, on 04/13/2008, -0/+7Somebody should give the Colorado River a stern lecturing, going about taking credit for another rivers work. The shame of it.
- rangermatt, on 04/14/2008, -0/+6Alex, it's certainly the only plausible one that doesn't involve a whole lot of mental calisthenics. Occam's Razor - simplest is probably true. Yes, the earth could be 6000 years old and formed in a flood that just happened to only carve out this one tiny stretch of land... a flood that somehow buried every fossil in successions of rock layers, so that the simplest fossils were in the bottom layers and the most complex ones were at the top... and that the lower rock layers had no animals at all and just plants... and the lowest ones didn't have any fossils at all... and this flood somehow didn't destroy delicate cave formations or geyser cones... and this flood somehow didn't wash away moraines from the last ice age... and on and on and on...
Yeah, that COULD be true... OR the earth happens to be as old as it looks. - Soave, on 04/14/2008, -2/+8cvindustries, shut the ***** up. The sky is blue. You wouldn't call an apple "all the colors except red."
- gavincato, on 04/13/2008, -3/+9is it true the park rangers are told not to say it is millions of years old to avoid offending the - shall we say - religiously challenged?
I've never been there I live in Australia but I heard that is what happens - chrispeters, on 04/13/2008, -4/+10I don't know if you're joking or not... I really hope you are, for the sake of mankind if nothing else.
- inactive, on 04/13/2008, -2/+8And I'm sure a 2,000-year-old book of fairy tales is such a much more reliable source than scientific inquiry.
Please, for the love of God, Jimmy, demonstrate that you have at least a couple of brain cells in that vast, empty noggin of yours. - inactive, on 04/14/2008, -2/+7Idiot, that's 1% more data than you've got, so go take your Bible and shove it up your ass.
- emocean, on 04/14/2008, -2/+7hmm makes me think that the next time I tell someone the sky is blue, to be safe I should say 'Scientists agree that the color of the sky that you see when you look up is blue' :P
:: - Sommerlost, on 04/13/2008, -5/+10this i why I hate digg
- barfooz, on 04/14/2008, -1/+5The Grand Canyon isn't carved out of a mountain range, it's carved out of the Colorado Plateau. The river was originally running across mostly flat land.
- Narcism, on 04/13/2008, -3/+7well played.
- david5t, on 04/14/2008, -1/+5I think we all know the real secret; Megatron is frozen inside of it.
- noahhoward, on 04/13/2008, -1/+5It was obviously the invisible man don't worry about it Jimmy.
- H3LLSL337, on 04/14/2008, -0/+4Your reply made no sense to what he was referring too. It doesn't say anywhere in the Bible that the Earth is 6000 yrs old, nor does it say that He (God) created the animals out of nothing. Therefore, believing in a young Earth and God are not mutually inclusive. Just as Atheism and Evolution are not mutually exclusive.
It's my opinion that neither answer alone, the Bible or evolution, answers the question of where we came from or how life came to be in it's present state. Evolution doesn't answer how life came to be, the Bible doesn't answer how or what happened on Earth before man. Just because some fundamentalists believe in a young Earth, does not mean that all Christians do. That would be akin to saying that because some Asian people drive poorly, all drive poorly. Stereotyping all people of a faith, race, or idea is wrong. - JoeVet, on 04/13/2008, -2/+5who's making the stupid comment?
- sirbeta, on 04/13/2008, -0/+3Rivers do flow upward... Didn't you know...?
- misconstrued, on 04/13/2008, -0/+3So the world is only 12,000 years old? :P
- iofthestorm, on 04/13/2008, -0/+3That was awesome, A+++ would watch again.
- noahhoward, on 04/14/2008, -1/+4Are you suggesting god created the canyon then said "Hrmmm... this would go great with a planet!"
- rangermatt, on 04/14/2008, -0/+3Zion, Arches, Bryce Canyon, Canyonlands, and Capitol Reef National Parks all disagree with you.
But yeah, no Grand Canyon in Utah. - TheHydrogens, on 04/13/2008, -1/+4Rain?
- Vet4Peace, on 04/14/2008, -0/+3Not all Creationists are "Young Earth" Creationists. And not all Christians are Creationists. And not all American beers taste like watered-down urine.
Really. - cheezintern, on 04/14/2008, -2/+5What does that response even mean? So all those bones I see at the natural history museum are fake? I think your confused what the phrase empirical evidence means. In the wacky world of science, an archaeologist finds fossilized skeletons, either complete or incomplete, of creatures. These wacky scientists use fairly accurate carbon dating to find out the age. Then they compare the skeletons of present day creatures. There's no leap of faith required, it's all empirical!
- inactive, on 04/13/2008, -5/+7Yes, it's an obnoxious, tired comment. But it's also a reminder that we, in this day and age, live in a society wherein half the population actually thinks in those terms. Of course, there's no point posting this stuff on digg, because you're preaching to the choir here, but maybe, just maybe, we, as students of science, need to be more open about the fact that this whole Creationism business isn't just about evolution - it's about our entire understanding of the world around us.
- nitsuj, on 04/14/2008, -1/+3"Well, 99% or so of what science has "verified" as history is NOT based on forensic evidence, but extrapolation and supposition of the 1% with hard data to support it."
Please explain, in detail, exactly how you arrive at these percentage figures.
"...little fossil evidence compared to the number of species needed to have existed to go from the first life form through human beings in 2 billion years."
Think about what the properties of the Earth's crust must be to perfectly preserve all lifeforms that ever existed. Also think about what the properties of a lifeform must be in order for it to perfectly fossilize every time.
Now contrast this with what we presently know about the Earth's crust from geological science and you'll have the answer. - nitsuj, on 04/14/2008, -1/+3"But, if you are, then the theory of evolution has next to no scientific evidence since almost all of it is based on non-fossil-based science."
Once again you highlight your staggering ignorance despite being corrected over and over and over. You seem to be trapped in some kind of ignorance ground hog day.
Given what we know of the Earths geology, the fossil record is exactly how we'd expect to find it - including its record of species and the varying alterations in lifeforms over many millions of years.
Even without this, the genetic evidence for evolution overwhelms any other evidence we have and that includes the fossil record.
I guess you hadn't figured on this despite probably being told it a hundred times. Looks like you just shot yourself in the foot. Now who hasn't thought things through? - lndmn01, on 04/13/2008, -2/+4or at sharp angles.
- inactive, on 04/14/2008, -2/+4A River!! that would explain that wierd twisting shape of the grand canyon, oh and the shape carved out of rock
- tmyprod, on 04/14/2008, -0/+2Hey, I said I was no scientist.
- avengingturnip, on 04/13/2008, -2/+4Because...God...isn't...that...old?
- rangermatt, on 04/14/2008, -0/+2Yeah, but the Bible doesn't have to be 100% true or 100% false - that's a false dichotomy. Christians who actually study the Bible within its context should easily see that the creation story is poetry and is borrowed from other middle-eastern mythologies (epic of Gigamesh and all that). The Bible was never written to be scientific literature, so I don't know why any Christian would use it to shape their scientific beliefs.
I might believe that the Dalai Lama has lots of words of wisdom, but I sure as hell won't ask him to explain string theory to me. - Rassa, on 04/13/2008, -0/+2Some great pictures, thanks for sharing! I'm going to have to take a vacation out there and see that natural beauty with my own eyes.
- cvindustries, on 04/14/2008, -0/+2Good pictures. If I may add a suggestions - in some of them, the presence of color does not enhance the image. Make those black and white, increase the contrast a hair, and use a little burn and dodge and you'll turn good into spectacular.
- rangermatt, on 04/14/2008, -0/+1From Colorado and you've never been there? Oh man, go, now! Seriously, that whole region from Grand Junction on down to Flagstaff is amazing.
- inactive, on 04/14/2008, -1/+2can you prove it. the scientists analyzes the materials and he founds that, on a tested technique, the Grand Canyon was older than thought. you say this from a book that it isn't clear
- rangermatt, on 04/14/2008, -1/+2Believing in a God and an old earth aren't mutually exclusive. Just because some religious people believe the Earth is 6000 years old doesn't mean you must also believe that to be religious. A lot of Christians I know think they don't really have a choice and have to believe in a 6000 year-old Earth because their parents did. There are other (and in my opinion, more rational) beliefs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution
- inactive, on 04/14/2008, -1/+2My, there is still a lot of superstition in the world today! tsk tsk. /not kidding.
- forsight, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1Hmmm I wonder what direction the Mississippi river flows....North, binko!
- expert01, on 04/14/2008, -0/+1...your point being?
- TheHydrogens, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1How would flood waters receding do that?
-
Show 51 - 80 of 80 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is