“Have you ever seen the Grand Canyon? And do you like surprises? I must tell you about this one Tom threw at me!” says Jonathan Gray of beforeus.com. Here is the story from Gray’s latest newsletter, presented with his kind permission.
How awesome! It just kept dropping below me… down… down… down. I drank in the majesty of the canyon.
“Grand Canyon”… so well named!
My friend Thomas stood beside me. He broke the silence.
“Did you know that this Grand Canyon most likely started as a crack in the earth?”
“Oh come on, Tom, the Colorado River did it. Everybody knows that.”
Tom shook his head. “There is reason to believe that the canyon was originally cut by an electrical discharge from a passing heavenly body.”
“You mean, by a huge lightning bolt?”
“That’s right,” said Tom. “Those cracks perpendicular to the canyon resulted from an electrical arc. They are not water-caused rills.” And he added, “I believe it happened during the latter part of the Great Flood.”
Tom was a well respected scientist.
But I still had to ask him: “Are you serious?”
“Definitely,’ he responded.
WHY NOT WATER EROSION OVER LONG AGES?
“Of course,” he admitted, “I realise that most people assume the Colorado River formed the Grand Canyon.”
And it is also assumed that this took millions of years. After all, isn’t the canyon in parts up to a mile deep? Water erosion would take ages… well, wouldn’t it?
Not necessarily. Because if there really was a global flood disaster, on the scale implied by the evidence now coming to light, it could be an enormous, rapid event.
Just imagine it… continents and seas churned up together. Water-laid sediment tens of thousands of feet deep, stratified during 12 months by water movements on an unimaginable scale.
Then, finally the violent run-off into the tectonically enlarged ocean basins.
Volumes of water, laden with rocks, gravel and debris, running over newly-deposited, still unconsolidated soft ground, could easily scoop out a Grand Canyon in a short time.
Yes, it’s possible.
But, as Tom pointed out, this Grand Canyon was not scooped out that way. The perpendicular cracks give us the clue.
PROBLEMS WITH THE POPULAR THEORY
Tom stared at me, grinning.
“Okay”, I said. “There’s something else you know… right? Spit it out.”
Tom beamed. “Were you aware that the Grand Canyon humps in the middle, and that it stretches HIGHER than the upstream Colorado River?”
“No,” I confessed. “You mean…”
“Yes, to start cutting the Grand Canyon, the Colorado River would need to flow uphill! Do you see?
“Also, there is very little downstream detritus… which gives no support for the erosion theory.
“No – the Colorado River did NOT cut the Grand Canyon.”
I had to investigate this further.
Back home, I began researching. And discovered something else. It almost blew me away!
Did you know this? In reality, the Grand Canyon seems to be part of a crack in the earth’s crust. It starts in Mexico and runs underground all the way up to Yellowstone Park.
It seems likely that the retreating Flood waters did pour down into the crack from all directions in great abundance.
And then erosion did take place – but it was rapid erosion.
CANYON WATER LEVEL MUCH HIGHER IN 2000 BC?
Are you ready for another bombshell?
Could the river now flowing through this crack have been – as recently as 4,000 years ago – at a much higher level?
Now that’s a staggering thought!
On the front page of The Phoenix Gazette, on April 5, 1909, there appeared a most intriguing news report.
G.A. Kinkaid, an explorer working with Professor S.A. Jordan of the Smithsonian Institution, allegedly discovered a network of caverns, artificially hewn into the side of the Grand Canyon.
His report began as follows:
“First, I would impress that the cavern is nearly inaccessible. The entrance is 1,486 feet down the sheer canyon wall…. I was journeying down the Colorado river in a boat, alone, looking for mineral.
“Some forty-two miles up the river from the El Tovar Crystal canyon, I saw on the east wall, stains in the sedimentary formation about 2,000 feet above the river bed.
“There was no trail to this point, but I finally reached it with great difficulty. Above a shelf which hid it from view from the river, was the mouth of the cave.
“There are steps leading from this entrance some thirty yards to what was, at the time the cavern was inhabited, the level of the river.
“When I saw the chisel marks on the wall inside the entrance, I became interested.” (Nexus, April-May 1993, pp. 36-39)
Following several hundred feet of passage, the explorer found himself in a network of passages and hundreds of rooms radiating from a central point like spokes in a wheel.
The relics seen (some of which he photographed by flashlight) were astonishing. There were mummies, images and artifacts of a high technology. And an unknown grey metal resembling platinum. Everywhere he looked, hieroglyphics were to be seen.
Does that awaken your appetite?
But here is the bombshell that blows to pieces our ideas on how long it took the canyon to form.
The point is that this archaeological site is some 2,000 feet above the present river bed. And it has steps leading a short distance to the former river level.
Do you see? This would mean that the water in the river was about 2,000 feet higher only a few thousand years ago.
If this is true, then the water level dropped 2,000 feet lower in just a few thousand years since those first explorers were here.
That drop in water level would have been rapid at first – due to the huge amount of water on the continent.
Of course, the entire story could be an elaborate newspaper hoax. However, the fact that it was on the front page, named the prestigious Smithsonian Institution, and gave a highly detailed story that went on for several pages, lends a great deal to its credibility. It is hard to believe such a story could have come out of thin air.
More recently, two backpackers who entered the Grand Canyon claimed that at an elevation of some 800 feet, they saw several cave entrances, just as reported in the newspaper article.
But the entrances all seemed to be sealed shut or destroyed, as if to keep everyone out. (This raises the question, Why would anyone want to deliberately seal off caves in such a remote area, so difficult of access?)
Being expert rock climbers, the two men climbed toward the most promising looking cave entrance.
Upon reaching the entrance they discovered that, several feet in, it had likewise been sealed off with native rock. The entrance itself appeared to be man made. A 6 foot circular pattern was clearly hewn into the ceiling.
The question arises, if the newspaper article was a mere hoax, then what did these more recent backpackers stumble upon? And why were the entrances to such extremely remote caves sealed?
And something else. The backpacker’s discovery was made at least 40 miles from the location given in the newspaper article. So, if the newspaper report was not a hoax, and the backpackers had found the real location, could the newspaper location have been misinformation to keep people away?
But the point of my mentioning the story, is this.
If the report is genuine, then those early post-Flood, Egyptian-style visitors were in a canyon whose water run-off was still copious, the Flood-laid sediments still relatively soft.
And in the few millennia since that time, the river has dropped anything up to 2,000 feet lower. Or 800 feet lower. It doesn’t matter how much. It has not taken millions of years.
I notice that most inhabited areas of the planet are reported to be drier than they were even a century ago. Water shortages will feature in coming media news broadcasts.