Evolution or Creation?
The Channeled Scablands
There was a geological controversy about how the Channeled Scablands in eastern Washington state were formed.[18]
After extensive
fieldwork in 1922, J. Harlan Bretz, a Ph.D. geologist at the University of Chicago,
concluded that they were caused by a gigantic, catastrophic flood. He calculated
that 3000 square miles were swept by a superflood, which at points may have
been up to 1,000 feet deep. More than 2,000 square miles were scrubbed bare,
forming the scablands. Nearly 1,000 square miles of the scablands contain gravel
deposits from the eroded basalt. Later calculations indicated that it all happened
within 30 days.[18]
South of the Grand Coulee dam, the most interesting scablands feature is the
upper Grand Coulee, a channel carved right through solid basalt, some of it
down to the underlying granite. Bretz said it is the best example of water forming
a canyon in the world.[18]
It is 50 miles long and several miles across. If this canyon had been formed by the standard erosional processes that we observe today, it would be a v- or u-shaped valley. Since it is not, Bretz thought that perhaps it was formed by something not in our immediate experience.[18]
At the end of upper Grand Coulee is Dry Falls, another massive geological feature. It is 350 to 400 feet high and over 3 miles long. Dry Falls is almost five times the width of Niagara Falls and over twice as high. Even though it is in arid country, Bretz had was sure that this was once a gigantic waterfall. There is even evidence of plunge pools, undercutting, and cataract retreat.[18]
Bretz observed and studied many other formations, most of which indicated a superflood. One is Palouse Canyon, again, cut through solid basalt. Several of these canyons had cataracts at their heads and/or hanging valleys. Bretz also reported many massive flood deposits near Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. Some deposits contained boulders 3 to 4 feet in diameter. Quincy Basin, in the western part of the scablands, has huge amounts of gravel covering 500 square miles, at a depth of at least 125 feet. At its peak, water from the superflood flowed at a rate greater than the combined flow of all the rivers of the world today.[18]
Bretz published several papers on the scablands. His 1923 paper from the Journal of Geology contending that a superflood caused the Channeled Scablands blew the minds of his fellow geologists. He had made one trip of 1,000 miles over the scablands and another of 2,000 miles, but it made no difference to them. No one backed his theory; he received a lot of resistance, especially from the US Geological Survey. He confronted these geologists at a 1927 meeting of the geological society of Washington, DC, where he was on the program. The next week he wrote to a friend who was teaching at my high school. He said "they were all loaded for me and after letting me talk for two hours they opened fire."[18]
In general, uniformitarianism argues that changes in the past happened as we see change occur today. Thus change in the past had to have happened slowly and weakly, often over a long period of time.[18]
On uniformitarianism criticism was that Bertz had an unconvincing source for his superflood, which was glacial melt. So in 1930 Bretz published a paper suggesting Lake Missoula, once a gigantic lake formed in Montana by melting glaciers that had subsequently emptied out. The shoreline of this was first observed on sentinel mountain above Missoula in 1878.[18]
Then J. T. Pardee discovered giant ripple marks in the early 1940's . They are 20 to 30 feet high and from 200 to 300 feet apart. This find indicated that there had been a huge flow of water out of Lake Missoula, as Bretz had predicted.[18]
In 1952 Bertz found even more giant ripple marks from the superflood. He published a detailed account of these while rebutting his critics and undermining rival theories. Finally, after a well-attended 1965 field trip to the scablands, most geologists accepted Bretz' superflood.[18]
How could intelligent, highly-educated geologists previously reject Bertz's well-researched theory about the scablands without even going out to see them?[18]
That is despite much evidence of megacatastrophes, Charles Lyell, Charles Lyell, a lawyer who had taken up geology, convinced naturalists that using the uniformitarian assumption was the scientific way to view earth history. The strength of Lyell's uniformitarian assumption and its attraction was, and is, ideological - it automatically eliminated Noah's Flood and appealed to naturalism, a view many find, attractive.[18]
The uniformitarian geologists of the U. S. Geological survey did not want to put their stamp of approval on Bretz's research for fear of lending credence to Noah's Flood. This is the best reason as to why respected scientists dismissed a fellow-geologist's well-supported theory on the scablands without even going to see the scablands themselves. It was not until years later that they went to the scablands and finally agreed with Bretz.[18]