Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

HOW OLD IS THE GRAND CANYON? PARK SERVICE WON’T SAY!!!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
pdrichards114 Donating Member (215 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-04-07 03:05 PM
Original message
HOW OLD IS THE GRAND CANYON? PARK SERVICE WON’T SAY!!!
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.’”

In a letter released today, PEER urged the new Director of the National Park Service (NPS), Mary Bomar, to end the stalling tactics, remove the book from sale at the park and allow park interpretive rangers to honestly answer questions from the public about the geologic age of the Grand Canyon. PEER is also asking Director Bomar to approve a pamphlet, suppressed since 2002 by Bush appointees, providing guidance for rangers and other interpretive staff in making distinctions between science and religion when speaking to park visitors about geologic issues.

In August 2003, Park Superintendent Joe Alston attempted to block the sale at park bookstores of Grand Canyon: A Different View by Tom Vail, a book claiming the Canyon developed on a biblical rather than an evolutionary time scale. NPS Headquarters, however, intervened and overruled Alston. To quiet the resulting furor, NPS Chief of Communications David Barna told reporters and members of Congress that there would be a high-level policy review of the issue.

According to a recent NPS response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed by PEER, no such review was ever requested, let alone conducted or completed.

Park officials have defended the decision to approve the sale of Grand Canyon: A Different View, claiming that park bookstores are like libraries, where the broadest range of views are displayed. In fact, however, both law and park policies make it clear that the park bookstores are more like schoolrooms rather than libraries. As such, materials are only to reflect the highest quality science and are supposed to closely support approved interpretive themes. Moreover, unlike a library the approval process is very selective. Records released to PEER show that during 2003, Grand Canyon officials rejected 22 books and other products for bookstore placement while approving only one new sale item — the creationist book.

Ironically, in 2005, two years after the Grand Canyon creationist controversy erupted, 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 Interpretive and educational programs must refrain from appearing to endorse religious beliefs explaining natural processes.”

“As one park geologist said, this is equivalent of Yellowstone National Park selling a book entitled Geysers of Old Faithful: Nostrils of Satan,” Ruch added, pointing to the fact that previous NPS leadership ignored strong protests from both its own scientists and leading geological societies against the agency approval of the creationist book. “We sincerely hope that the new Director of the Park Service now has the autonomy to do her job.”


http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=801
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-04-07 03:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. The Grand Canyon is approximately 7.5 years old.
There is no verifiable eye witnesses accounts of the Grand Canyon being older than 7.5 years old, before I went there and saw it myself.

My alternative view of the Grand Canyon is just as valid as everybody elses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sherman A1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-04-07 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Wow!
It's that old? I saw it in 2002 and didn't realize that it was 7.5 years old. I thought it had just been finished the morning before the family arrived..... Amazing..... Simply Amazing!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-04-07 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Yes, it really is that old.
Now let us praise the Lord and all his wonders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
originalpckelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-04-07 03:52 PM
Response to Original message
4. I say someone goes to the Grand Canyon, and records on...
video what answer they give in response to that question. People need undeniable evidence to prove this, or it will continue to happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jawja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-04-07 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Actually,
Edited on Thu Jan-04-07 04:01 PM by Jawja
I did go to the Grand Canyon in October and at the Visitor's Center at Mather Point, there is a "History of the Grand Canyon" display that tracks it's development from about 250 million years B.C. I read the whole thing and it was very informative.

on edit: spelling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
twilight_sailing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-04-07 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
5. can we PLEASE go back to living in the real world now?
It's high time.

If we do not, the rest of the world is simply going to pass us by. Take stem cell research, for example. For the love of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, let's learn again to admit that what is true is true.

These Bush years have been personally hard on me (and a lot of others too). God did not come down and carve out the canyon with a spoon. Let's get real now, please. Bush and his morons are a minority group. Admittedly, they were a powerful political group but they were always a minority group. The rest of us can have God in our lives or not and still have truth. We are not bothered by science. We LIKE science. It's pulled us out of, as my grandmother used to say, the mud.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Geek_Girl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-04-07 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. The Bushy's of the World want us in the mud.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Az Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-04-07 04:01 PM
Response to Original message
8. If the facts don't agree with their opinions then the facts must be wrong
Sheesh. Ok, the fundamentalists I get. But the park rangers caving in.... good grief.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The2ndWheel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-04-07 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
9. I could care less myself
Just enjoy it. Our time only goes as far as our atmosphere anyway. If we were further away, or closer to the sun, a little bigger, spun quicker, it would all alter our concept of time. How about just let the canyon be?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Az Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-04-07 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Because its history is part of what it is
The canyon is not just a ditch. And the fundamentalists would dismiss that history because it is inconvienient to them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RiverStone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-04-07 04:11 PM
Response to Original message
11. Why not ask Pat Robertson?
Betya that nutjob knows exactly when his delusion was created that forms a Grand Canyon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hashibabba Donating Member (894 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-04-07 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
12. I think it is important to get the truth out and not listen to *stories*
that have nothing to do with science. If people want to believe its only 6,000 years old, let them do it at homel, in church and on their own time. It's ridiculous to have our park rangers perpetuating a myth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chiyo-chichi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-04-07 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
13. HOW MANY TIMES WILL THIS SAME THREAD BE POSTED? DU WON'T SAY!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 05:44 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC