One article I’d like to comment on can be found here: www.drdino.com/articles.php?spec=95. It is written by John Hinton who must be a very intelligent and perceptive person to have so thoroughly destroyed in only 6 short paragraphs, the geological observations of thousands of scientists over the last 200 years.
John Hinton begins his article with this statement:
Standing at the bottom of the Grand Canyon and concluding that the multiple bands that line the canyon walls are products of millions of years of sedimentation is just plain stupid.
He then clearly demonstrates his training and careful thought processes with the following statements:
I spent a couple of weeks wandering through the Grand Canyon when I was in my early twenties.
And:
The idea that nearly perfect stripes would have formed through years of decay, being of distinct and differing colors, and without erosion lines, was just plain dumb.
And (I have left the spelling or grammar mistake uncorrected):
I was puzzled at the time as to why they so many scientists were so gullible, but I just figured that they were morons and left it at that.
Years later, after coming to Christ and asking the Holy Spirit to guide me in all that I do, I understood why they insisted on following such a nonsensical theory. I then understood that they were not just morons, but they were morons with an agenda that guided all of their science falsely so called.
Having established John Hinton’s impeccable credentials, I would like to ask him why he stopped thinking as soon as he encountered an intellectual difficulty choosing rather to label anyone else who had a different opinion “morons.”
According to John Hinton:
The line that “it had been carved out by a river” made absolutely no sense to me, but what puzzled me more were the evenly colored stripes of even heights that were uniformly found throughout the entire canyon. Not being a Christian at that time, I was not troubled by the idea of the earth being millions or billions of years old, but I was not able to understand how each of these individual layers, or stripes, got to be of one unified color.
Did they expect us to believe that millions of years of light pink debris were followed by millions of years of gray debris, followed by millions of years of dark pink debris, and so forth? What possible factors could have explained this uniformity of color, not to mention the uniformity of the lines dividing the layers? They are relatively smooth, even lines that stretch for great distances without any signs of erosion between them. It actually looked like the product of different types and weights of silt settling after a flood, although at the time, I erroneously considered the possibility of more than one flood having been involved.
Without commenting on the specific formations containing the beds and layers of which John Hinton speaks, he has apparently never heard of unconformities and diagenetic alteration of sediments leading to the so-called uniformity of colors to which he refers. He attributes it all to a single flood deposit without even knowing what the rock types are nor of the mineral composition, grain size, texture, and fabric. If he does know, he must feel that such characteristics are too unimportant to mention. I am not an expert in the stratigraphy of the Grand Canyon, but I am very sure that there are layers of coarse-grained sediments both above and below additional layers of fine silt and clay sediments. And that would be over-simplifying to an absurd degree on my part. In other words, the lithologies are interbedded and highly variable through time, reflecting the different depositional environments that created them. If these sediments were deposited in a single event, why aren’t all the coarse grained rocks at the bottom, grading into fine clay at the top?
I guess I’m just too stupid to live, by gum! John, can you enlighten me as to your higher thought processes so I can make sense of them?
While you’re at it can you please answer the following:
1. Why does it make no sense to you that the Grand Canyon was eroded, or carved out by the Colorado river and its tributaries?
2. How do you know that the beds are not separated by erosion lines? Describe for me what an erosion line means. In fact, while you’re at it describe to me your understanding of unconformities, disconformities, paraconformities, angular unconformities, and nonconformaties.
3. How long did it take you to determine that the beds of which you speak “…were uniformly found throughout the entire canyon…”?
4. Why do you make a point that you once were not a Christian as if that mattered one iota when it comes to the facts unless you are trying to use a manipulative tactic? As if you were somehow once a moron too, but were persuaded by the superior reasoning power of the Young Earth Creationist Elite.
5. I’m sorry for sinking to your level, but you deserve it. Moron.
Let’s at least try to have some respect for each other. I don’t really believe you are a moron, nor do I believe that other people of faith are anything but compassionate human beings just trying to find the truth. Scientists sometimes pride themselves on reversing their cherished theories in favor of better ones but they can’t do that unless they are willing to at least admit the possibility that they might be in error. They must be willing to look at the evidence, not ignore it.
