What else is new? You slap the word “christian” on something and suddenly a controversy, regardless of it’s veracity evolves (no pun intended, really, I swear), but this is just across the line stupidity.

Daniel over at Lobowalk has, yet again, smashed the crap out of another leftist myth, this time that the National Parks Service is not allowed to give an official estimate of the Grand Canyon’s age because it would offend creationists who believe that the Canyon was created during the great flood.

I kid you not.

Of course, leftist after leftist is propagating this myth without even bothering to do the research. As Daniel notes, Arianna Huffington’s Huffingtonpost has pointed out that same canard. We’re meant to be all angry at the flat-earthers as they’ve tried to permeate the annals of science with their pesky silliness (after all, isn’t all religion silly?).

Except, that her and her leftist alarmists are all wrong including the “me too” idiots in the comments section of the post.

As Daniel correctly notes, there is an actual explanation on the official website of the Grand Canyon. Here’s what he found:

How old is the Canyon?

That’s a tricky question. Although rocks exposed in the walls of the canyon are geologically quite old, the Canyon itself is a fairly young feature. The oldest rocks at the canyon bottom are close to 2000 million years old. The Canyon itself - an erosional feature - has formed only in the past five or six million years. Geologically speaking, Grand Canyon is very young.

Are the oldest rocks in the world exposed at Grand Canyon?

No. Although the oldest rocks at Grand Canyon (2000 million years old) are fairly old by any standard, the oldest rocks in the world are closer to 4000 million years old. The oldest exposed rocks in North America, which are among the oldest rocks in the world, are in northern Canada.

In digging through the website, I found another mention of the Grand Canyon’s age along with a geological exploration of the makeup of the canyon itself.

How old is the canyon itself? The early history and evolution of the Colorado River (of which Grand Canyon is only a part) is the most complex aspect of Grand Canyon geology. We know that the erosion which has shaped the canyon has occurred only in the past five to six million years. This is only yesterday, considering the age of the rocks through which the river has carved.

That looks kinda like an estimation of age to me, what about you?

Something tells me that there’s no gag order on the Parks Department with regards to the age of the Canyon.

It’s weirder than that, though. Huffingtonpost mentions a book sold at the Bookstore. In it, the theory is presented that the Grand Canyon is the result of the great flood in Noah’s time. Of course, this sets the anti-religion zealots into a tizzy. They absolutely hate the idea that a book that has a Christian overtone might be in a bookstore of the park.

In keeping with the pattern of easily destroying poor biased arguments, I decided to check into some of the materials in the bookstore myself. Being an astute reader, I actually found a few things that go oddly unmentioned in all the leftist hyperbole surrounding this one book.

One of my favorites was this one:

Medwyn Goodall triumphs in his final chapter of the successful Medicine Woman Trilogy. This series celebrates womanhood and the power of the Goddess in bringing the restorative journey to fruition with the traditional woodwind instrumentation.

Yep, that’s Goddess with a capital G. Hardly some fleeting mention of women.

Then there’s this one:

Alice Gomez features her best-loved songs from earlier releases as well as new compositions taking listeners on a journey into the world and forklore of the Native Southwest.

And of course, this one.

Earnest, intriguing and ultimately enlightening. By blending stark, passionate Native American ceremonial chants with Western influenced instrumental tracks, its appeal stretches across geographical borders, introducing new listeners to a vocal and emotional message as old as time itself.

Seems there’s a whole lot of religion going on in the bookstore, huh?

Just to be clear, I’m not calling for the removal of Native American ceremonial literature or CD’s. I am however wondering why there seems to be this obsession about getting rid of this one book all of a sudden. Boing Boing continues its usual “sky is falling” pattern with regards to anything that mentions the word “God” in it with the following quote from a FOIA request about the book and its review:

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 [and] 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,” (said PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch.)

Or a CD with spiritual chants, a CD with mentions of Goddesses, and other Native American stuff.

None of the material I looked at seemed to be all that scholarly. There are a lot of comic books, lots of trinkets, a few books, and some CD’s.

So what have we learned from this post?

1. That “cultural” learning is only okay when the culture isn’t Christians.
2. That despite the best efforts to prove otherwise, there are plenty of references to the Canyon’s age.
3. That commenters on the Huffingtonpost are frigging morons who can’t think for themselves and are easily manipulated and can’t bother to follow a story and seek the veracity of it.
4. That two minutes of research goes a long way toward disproving idiocy.
5. That Daniel Medley is brilliant.

Class dismissed.

Technorati Tags: huffingtonpost, leftists, idiots

This entry was posted on Monday, January 1st, 2007 at 12:51 pm and is filed under Stupid. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.