You may have heard the rumor that the National Park Service staff at the Grand Canyon is instructed to refrain from telling visitors how old the Grand Canyon is. The reason stated was that they did not want to offend creationists who believe in a 6,000 year old Earth. A 6,000 year old Earth is in contradiction to the current understanding of mainstream science. As it turns out, it is NOT true that the staff is instructed to say this.
Read how Skeptic Magazine was duped by the Grand Canyon story. Michael Shermer, editor of Skeptic Magazine offers a detailed blow by blow account of how the story got printed and it’s quick fallout. In a nutshell he got duped by the PEER organization and is pretty steamed about it. (Article link is at the beginning of this paragraph.)
A statement from the now deprecated article read:
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.
Peer review is the backbone of the scientific process. And it was Skeptic Magazine’s own readers who called it’s staff on the misinformation about the Park Service stance on this issue.
Here is a detailed response from Dave Barna on current protocol for National Park Service staff working at the Grand Canyon. He also provides an explanation as to why this rumor might have started. . Thank you Mr. Burna for addressing this issue with a detailed response.
RESPONSE FROM CHIEF OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
Recently there have been several media and internet reports concerning the National Park Service’s interpretation of the formation of the Grand Canyon.
The National Park Service uses the latest National Academy of Sciences explanation for the geologic formation of the Grand Canyon. Our guidance to the field is contained in NPS Director’s Order # 6 and requires that 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.
Therefore, our interpretive talks, way-side exhibits, visitor center films, etc use the following explanation for the age of the geologic features at Grand Canyon. If asked the age of the Grand Canyon, our rangers use the following answer.
The principal consensus among geologists is that the Colorado River basin has developed in the past 40 million years and that the Grand Canyon itself is probably less than five to six million years old. The result of all this erosion is one of the most complete geologic columns on the planet.
The major geologic exposures in Grand Canyon range in age from the 1.7 billion year old Vishnu Schist at the bottom of the Inner Gorge to the 270 million year old Kaibab Limestone on the Rim.
So, why are there news reports that differ from this explanation? Since 2003 the park bookstore has been selling a book that gives a creationism view of the formation of the Grand Canyon, claiming that the canyon is less than six thousand years old. This book is sold in the inspirational section of the bookstore. In this section there are
photographic texts, poetry books, and Native American books (that also give an alternate view of the canyon’s origin).
The park’s bookstore contains scores of text that give the NPS geologic view of the formation of the canyon.
We do not use the “creationism†text in our teaching nor do we endorse its content. However, it is not our place to censure alternate beliefs. Much like your local public library, you will find many alternate beliefs, but not all of these beliefs are used in the school classroom.
It is not our place to tell people what to believe. We recognize that alternate views exist, but we teach the scientific method for the formation of the Grand Canyon.
I hope this explanation helps.
David Barna
Chief of Public Affairs
National Park Service
Washington, DC
Registered Professional Geologist (AIPG #6528)
Licensed Geologist (North Carolina # 129)