In August 2003, the Park Service approved a creationist text, Grand Canyon: A Different
View, for sale in park bookstores and museums. The book by Tom Vail claims that the
Grand Canyon is really only a few thousand years old, developing over a biblical rather
than an evolutionary time scale. That same month, the Grand Canyon National Park
superintendent appealed to NPS Headquarters for a “review of the book in terms of its
appropriateness” for sale in a park-sponsored facility.
During this same period, a review by Park Service geologists not only found the book
wildly inaccurate but that its sale violated agency policies and undercut its scientific
education programs. On January 25, 2004 David Shaver, the Chief of the Park Service’s
Geologic Resources Division sent a memo (enclosed) to NPS Headquarters calling for
removal of the book, concluding --
“Our review of …NPS policies and Grand Canyon: A Different View, lead us to
conclude that this book: does not use accurate, professional and scholarly knowledge;
is not based on science but a specific religious doctrine; does not further the public's
understanding of the Grand Canyon's existence; does not further the mission of the
National Park Service…and finally, that this book should not have been approved for
sale in NPS affiliated book sales.”
Ironically, in January 2005, your Director’s Order # 6 was amended to provide:
8.4.2 Historical and Scientific Research. Superintendents, historians, scientists,
and interpretive staff are responsible for ensuring that park interpretive and
educational programs and media are accurate and reflect current
scholarship…Questions often arise round the presentation of geological,
biological, and evolutionary processes. The interpretive and educational treatment
used to explain the natural processes and 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. The facts, theories, and
interpretations to be used will reflect the thinking of the scientific community in
such fields as biology, geology, physics, astronomy, chemistry, and paleontology.
Interpretive and educational programs must refrain from appearing to
endorse religious beliefs explaining natural processes. Programs, however,
may acknowledge or explain other explanations of natural processes and events.
(Emphasis added)
You are officially on the other side of the rabbit hole.