It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How old is Grand Canyon? No Comment!

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 10:05 AM
link   


HOW OLD IS THE GRAND CANYON? PARK SERVICE WON’T SAY — Orders to Cater to Creationists Makes National Park Agnostic on Geology


Washington, DC — 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, according to documents released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).

“In order to avoid offending religious fundamentalists, our National Park Service is under orders to suspend its belief in geology,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch. “It is disconcerting that the official position of a national park as to the geologic age of the Grand Canyon is ‘no comment.’”

........

“As one park geologist said, this is equivalent of Yellowstone National Park selling a book entitled Geysers of Old Faithful: Nostrils of Satan,”



Source

This is amazing. So now we have to distort and suppress real science because it may not coincide with certain religious timelines!? What if i believed that the sun was created by Thor and the reason it glows is because Thor uses it as a furnace to make new hammers...maybe we should block all science that says otherwise...



[edit on 30-12-2006 by xEphon]




posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Sad but true. I've known about it for awhile.

This is not true in other parks, simply because the Creationists haven't shown up to shriek and be offended that material exists showing the Earth is much older than 6,000 years. So the signage in Big Bend National Park DOES talk about the Cretaceous volcanos and the huge outflow and the age of the volcanic necks and the vast oceans that covered the area for millions of years.

I hope the next administration isn't of the Bush lineage. We've lost a lot of ground in technology and science thanks to their support of some rather limited views (such as the appointment of David Hager to head women's health issues (his view is that you can cure PMS and women's health and fertility problems by converting to Christianity and praying.))



posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 11:57 AM
link   
Sometimes I wonder of what kind of America eduction the religious fundamentalist are trying to pursue in the name of their religious views.

It seems that if they get away with their own distortion of historical and scientific facts our nation educational system will become the laughing stock in comparison with other modern nations.

We are to be the most ignorant super power in the world.

Or perhaps real education will be limited to the elite that can afford it.

Right now our nation do not rank very well when it comes to education anyway.

Perhaps under fundamentalist views we will be reading the Bible in schools and learning from their historical point of view and become a theocratic rule nation no better than religious base nations like the middle east.

I guess keeping the population ignorance will make possible for better manipulation.

I can not believe that in the name of political correctness we have to support ignorance.



posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Wow, those creationists are horrible! I mean, we have managed to completely remove any trace of creationism from schools, books, TV and all media, but they are still trying to prove their point...why wouldn't they simply disappear?

Everything has been created by coincidence, as our science will explain in detail. There is no intelligent design of any kind. All complicated laws of universe were created by particles accidentally bumping into each other etc.

That is science, and we should know it.

Those creationists are totally irrational.



posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 01:30 PM
link   
Believe base on faith, belongs in the Church bible study groups classroom.

Real science and historical Facts belong in the curriculum.

If people with religious fundamentalist believes wants to pursue the believes of their choices they can do it in the privacy of their homes.

When choices are limited manipulation is easier specially when it comes to the minds of young people.

But that young people will become the adults of tomorrow, and narrow mindedness has no room in a free society.



[edit on 30-12-2006 by marg6043]

[edit on 30-12-2006 by marg6043]



posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 01:37 PM
link   
agreed.

I have no problem with a persons belief in creationism, however, if its true it should coincide with our science and not butt heads with it. If that can't be done, then at least offer both as an option. But to deny valid science outright because it doesnt mesh with a theory based on faith is pretty silly. Things like that have the potential to lead mass amounts of people into outright ignorance.

[edit on 30-12-2006 by xEphon]



posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 02:33 PM
link   
Worse than that, the park is actually selling Creationist books in the visitor center, which is against National Park regulations. All books sold at National parks have to go through a review process. The terms clearly state that they are supposed to be educational and based on the most up to date scientific evidence that has been verified by reputable scientists.

"The NPS approved a new directive on “Interpretation and Education (Director’s Order #6) which reinforces the posture that materials on the “history of the Earth must be based on the best scientific evidence available, as found in scholarly sources that have stood the test of scientific peer review and criticism [and] Interpretive and educational programs must refrain from appearing to endorse religious beliefs explaining natural processes.” -quoted from PEER

Sad to see Creationist nonsense in our National Parks. Heck, even Pope John Paul II embraced the findings of evolutionary scientists.

Here is a link to more information: www.peer.org...

Link to a review on the book by the National Center for Science Education: www.ncseweb.org...



posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 04:14 PM
link   
exactly! So how can the administration overrule the regulations of the national park service? Wouldn't something like that have to be sent through congress since the NPS is a federal agency? ...



posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Rubbish! This a direct effort to keep americans in the dark about what "they" know to be true, so that "they" can continue to push their ideology.

Personally, I believe you have to of lower intelligence if you can believe this Erath is only 6000 years old. Perhaps they meant in "dog years"


Just rubbish.

AAC



posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 04:32 PM
link   
Sadly the NPS is a very political organization, particularly at the local level. They do all sorts of foolish things. My bet is that the decision was a local one and resulted from significant pressure from Creationist groups. The fool in charge at Grand Canyon should be dismissed for breach of procedure and supporting ignorance.

Hmm ... we could start a writing campaign here on ATS to the Director of National parks asking her to uphold Directors order #6 and to have the book removed and the scientific facts regarding the canyons age become public once again.

You can write to: Mary A Bomar National Park Service 1849 C Street NW Washington, DC 20240

And to: Regional Director Mike Snyder National Park Service 12795 Alameda Pkwy Denver, CO 80225

Both of these addresses are posted on the NPS Website along with further contact information. Let's put the power of ATS and it's members to work to help Deny Ignorance!



posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 04:43 PM
link   
oops wrong thread *Removed by author*

[edit on 30-12-2006 by Terapin]



posted on Jan, 1 2007 @ 11:43 AM
link   
What a joke. What do you expect though, 2008 cannot come soon enough



posted on Jan, 1 2007 @ 02:26 PM
link   
So besides blowing up things and of course religion.... can someone remind me once again the difference between right wing Christian funnymentalists and right wing Islamic funnymentalists?



posted on Jan, 1 2007 @ 07:43 PM
link   
Sometimes I think Fundamentalists need a good swift kick in the fundament! They need to keep their educational views in their own Churches and out of National Parks.



posted on Jan, 1 2007 @ 11:25 PM
link   
The problem is with you people - you think that "creationists" are simple, crazy people, who do not understand science. Well, they think the same of you...you are not accepting ANY creationism to even be an acceptable theory, since "there is no proof"...like you have a solid proof for your theories. Theory of "coincidence", theory of "big bang", theory of "evolution" have something in common - NO EVIDENCE to support them. They are just theories, and in case of evolution - with much more proof against it than for it.

I will not go deeper into discussion, since there is another section of ATS for this, but it is a very high level of intollerance on your side - you are not accepting creationism even AS A THEORY. You feel threatened by it, yet, the law in US has absolutely in favor of "theory of coincidence" - which is taught at schools and universities. And that is the ONLY theory that any child will ever learn in US. That is sad. That is not free thinking, that is more like tirany of thought.

I am a "creationst", a "fundamentalist" in your view...and people like me are keeping this world from progress.



posted on Jan, 1 2007 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ikema
What a joke. What do you expect though, 2008 cannot come soon enough

So true. I've been around and everyday now is getting more and more traumatic, nonesensical and stupid. ( I could go on and on) but will spare you my trauma of these Bush years. For now.



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by swimmer
Well, they think the same of you...you are not accepting ANY creationism to even be an acceptable theory, since "there is no proof"...like you have a solid proof for your theories. Theory of "coincidence", theory of "big bang", theory of "evolution" have something in common - NO EVIDENCE to support them. They are just theories, and in case of evolution - with much more proof against it than for it.


Evolution is not a theory, it's fact, the only reason books still call it
a theory, is because fundamentalists have a fit about it.
There is overwhelming evidence for evolution, we can even see
evolution in action on microscopic scales in short amounts of time,
and have even seen evolution in the macroscopic world in birds
over a period of a few years.

Coincidence is'nt a theory, it's not really science, it's a part of life.

We have evidence of the big bang, the most prominent being the microwave background.
Though to be fair, I believe the universe has always existed, just
the big bang created this version, or perhaps created matter.



That is sad. That is not free thinking, that is more like tyranny of thought.


No, tyranny of thought would be telling you could'nt think something,
or express your views.

Teaching science rather than religious mythology is not tyranny of
thought.



...and people like me are keeping this world from progress.


Glad you see that.



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 07:29 AM
link   
It breaks down like this:

a hypothesis is an unproven suggestion or idea of how something works. When a scientist has a working hypothesis , they are running tests on it to determine if it will hold up to scrutiny. If it does not, it is discarded. If it survives consistently (you get the same result over and over again) to challenges it becomes:

A theory which is a scientific hypothesis that is self consistent, that has results that are predictable and is stable.

Only after it has been proven over and over again until its results are a given or constant is it given the moniker "Law".

The big key that ties all these terms together is that the hypothesis/theory/law is subjected to test after test over and over again and is subject to peer review, in other words somebody else can conduct the same experiments and get the same results.

By no scientifically verifiable standards does "creation science" deserve the moniker "science". It is a religiously based idea and as such is fine for individual ideals, but should under no means be taught as a science because it simply is not.

Now if its proponents can come up with verifiable hypothesis to prove their case, well then that is another matter all together, but so far all they have proven is that they do not understand how science works.

["you are not accepting ANY creationism to even be an acceptable theory, since "there is no proof"]
Swimmer

That very quote highlights the fact that you yourself understand nothing of science. Science is if anything, all about proofs... without proofs to back an idea up it is nothing but an unproven hypothesis and despite mangled usage hypothesis and theory are not interchangeable terms but mean two very specific things.

[edit on 2-1-2007 by grover]

[edit on 2-1-2007 by grover]



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 10:02 AM
link   
I have nothing else to say...you guys are too smart. I don't want to stop the world from progress, and I will shut up.

Have a good one.



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei

Evolution is not a theory, it's fact, the only reason books still call it
a theory,
IS because it is a theory, and an unprovable one at that.


There is overwhelming evidence for evolution, we can even see
evolution in action on microscopic scales in short amounts of time,
and have even seen evolution in the macroscopic world in birds
over a period of a few years.

Can you back that up with some facts please?
You have never seen 'evolution' as the 'scientists' like to call it.
You have seen mutations occur, but never, and I repeat never has anyone seen or documented a single case of one species changing into a completely different species, which is what we would need for evolution to be true.
It simply doesnt happen. One species does not, can not, and never has 'evolved' into a completely different species. Yes mutations occur, no doubt about it, but the idea that everything that is alive on the earth evolved from 'soup' is absurd.


Though to be fair, I believe the universe has always existed, just
the big bang created this version, or perhaps created matter.

So what exactly do you believe? There was no matter before the 'big bang'? What caused the 'big bang'? Where did the matter come from?
Where did the LAWS of physics come from?

My take on the age of the Grand Canyon is that it very well could be 10,000 years old.
Go ahead, bash away, I can take it.
My question to you 'evolutionists' is this.....
How can the earth, supposedly formed millions of years ago, still have active volcanoes? WOuldnt the earth have cooled off after millions of years?




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join