Hey guys, this is Matt Powell. So the Grand Canyon is probably one of my
favorite places to go to demonstrate that the Flood of Noah is a fact,
because the Grand Canyon is where the geologic column is, and the geologic
column is where evolution is based from. And they say you have Paleozoic,
Mesozoic, and Archaeozoic ages in the Grand Canyon, and they say that
this all represents millions of years of supposed geologic time where one
layer slowly formed upon another. But the truth is that we find no erosion,
virtually no erosion marks, between the layers. If you have a layer forming and
then it takes a long time for the next layer to form, you would expect to find
erosion if you were to break the layers apart. But when you break
certain of the layers apart, you'll often find that there are water
ripples connecting each of the layers. So what that means is that it was laid
down by water, and sedimentary rock, which the Grand Canyon is even made out
of, is defined as rock that was laid down by water. So whenever people say
the phrase Grand Canyon, it literally is defined as sedimentary rock which is
defined as rock that was laid down by water. So the name Grand Canyon
literally means canyon that was caused by a flood, layers that were laid
down by water. Now if certain of these layers were exposed for millions of
years, we would expect to find animal holes between the layers. I mean if you
have a layer forming and then it takes a long time for the next layer to
form, you would expect to find animal holes between the layers of animals that
lived during those supposed ages that burrowed down in those layers during
those ages. And so we don't find that at all. There is no animal holes
whatsoever, no bioliteration. And if certain of these layers were exposed
for millions of years, you would expect to find root remains of plants and
trees that grew down into the ground and put their roots down into the
ground. But again we don't find that because those layers were all formed at
the same time in one event. Now to answer an objection that I've heard
from Bill Nye, he stated that all of the clams were at the bottom layers, all
the lizards were closer to the bottom, and all the mammals were closer to the
top, and the birds were up at the top layers. So he says that you see how we
evolved over time. But the truth is that that's simply how the flood sorted
it. The flood sorted things based on their buoyancy. And so it would, of
course, the flood waters would put all the heavy stuff on the bottom, not so
heavy stuff closer to the bottom, less heavy stuff closer to the top, and then
birds at the top, of course, because they're the last ones to die. And so
when they see, well, you see how we evolved over time. It's such a con
artist trick. They don't actually think it through. People that take and consider
this, they don't think about what they're even being told, that they
evolved from a sponge, or that we all evolved from literal jellyfish. That's
what evolution teaches, is that we evolved from jellyfish. I always like to
ask people, do you think that your ancient ancestor was a fish? You know,
it's like the incredible Mr. Limpet 2.0. I wish, I wish, I were a fish. Well,
according to them, we were fish millions of years ago.
Now another reason that we know that all of the layers were deposited in
one event is because we find trilobite trails before we actually find the
trilobite fossil, millions of years before. And so what that proves is that
when the floodwaters were coming in and mud was being deposited, these trilobites
were trying to work their way up through the mud, and they died in the
upper layers, not able to outrun the mud. You find salamander tracks and
amphibian tracks 15 million years before you actually find the actual
salamander that made the tracks. I mean, let that sink in. You find trails
of all sorts of different animals before you actually find the animal that made
the trail, supposedly 15 or 20 million years before the animal that actually
made the trail that was found in the upper layers. So it just completely
falsifies evolution, because evolution is actually based on the geologic column.
And if the geologic column is false, evolution is false, and it falsifies
the theory from the bottom up and from the top down, because that's where
they base evolution theory off of.
Charles Lyell said that his goal in life, and he was the one who invented the
geologic column time scale, he said that his goal in life was to free the
sciences of Moses. So Charles Lyell just hated God, he hated the Bible, and
so he made up a complete and utter fairy tale known as the geologic
column. The Grand Canyon is absolute proof of a global event, of a worldwide
flood. That's why we find 10,000 adult myosaur in the center of the United
States buried together, and they had left their young behind. I mean, you
think about it, that water that was coming in was states away from the
central part of the United States where the myosaur, the 10,000 adult
myosaur, were even buried. And so that's not even part of the Grand
Canyon, but if we look all over the world, we see tons of flood evidence. We
find dinosaurs, a T-Rex in particular that I could think of that was found
under 50 feet of sediment. And if you look at the fossil, it died in a
position that it was gasping for air, it had suffocated to death. And
that's how it died, and it was preserved under 50 feet of mud. And
let me ask you a question, what would cause a T-Rex, a fully grown T-Rex
dinosaur, to be engulfed and encapsulated under 50 feet of mud and
dying in a suffocation position? The only way to explain that is the
flood of Noah. There is no other option. See, that's what people need to
understand is that when they discount the global flood, they're taking away
from science. They're actually denying science, and a lot of times they
do it ignorantly, but there are some who do it willfully ignorantly. Now
when you point these things out about the fossils that are found out of
place and the fact that you find tracks before you actually find the
animals, 15 million, 20 million, even 30 or 40 million before finding the
animals that supposedly existed after those tracks existed in the
layers, when you point this out to evolutionists, typically what they
do is they will say, well, we radiometrically date the Grand
Canyon rock layers, and so radiometric dating proves that the
Grand Canyon is millions of years old, and we evolved over time, and
that it represents millions of years of time. Well, the problem
with that is that radiometric rock dating has never worked even
once for rocks of known age. I mean, think about it. In 1980, Mount St. Helens
erupted, and it created igneous rock that flowed down the side of the
mountain, and some creation scientists took and tested this rock, this fresh
rock that was less than 10 years old, about 10 years after it erupted, and so
it was the worst volcano in US history. Well, they sent the rock samples that
were less than 10 years old to five different laboratories known as the
Geochron Laboratories, all of our best, and so they dated these rocks, and the
ages that they came back with were astounding. The samples came back as
follows. The first one, 340,000 years. The second, 350,000 years. The third,
900,000 years. One came back as 7 million years old. Now, this is the
dating method that they're saying is reliable, and we can date the crust of
the earth using this method. Another one came back as 2.8 million years old, so
here's the thing. Those are vastly different ages, so if they can't even get
a consistent date on rocks of known age, how are we supposed to trust this
radiometric dating process for rocks of unknown age? The Geochron
Laboratories used the radiometric dating process on rocks that were the
same age, less than 10 years old each, and came to vastly different ages, 7
million years on one of them, 340,000 years on another one, 350,000 years, 2.8
million years on another rock. I mean, these are all the same age rocks, but
they all come back as different ages, vastly different ages, which literally
proves beyond any shadow of doubt that this radiometric dating process is no
good, and that it's unscientific and should be thrown in the trash can.
you