Faith Lilac
Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!
edit
- Hi Faith Lilac! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
-- 17:33, Friday, March 18, 2016 (UTC)
| Mission 1 | Mission 2 | Mission 3 | Mission 4 | Mission 5 | Mission 6 | Mission 7 |
| Say Hello to the World | An Invitation to Earth | Small Changes, Big Impact | The Neutral Point of View | The Veil of Verifiability | The Civility Code | Looking Good Together |
Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!
edit - Hi Faith Lilac! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
-- 15:46, Monday, March 28, 2016 (UTC)
| Mission 1 | Mission 2 | Mission 3 | Mission 4 | Mission 5 | Mission 6 | Mission 7 |
| Say Hello to the World | An Invitation to Earth | Small Changes, Big Impact | The Neutral Point of View | The Veil of Verifiability | The Civility Code | Looking Good Together |
Biblical geology
editI am taking this here because it is no longer really on topic for the Teahouse.
To say that a particular scientist "believes in the Bible" does not mean that that person is a biblical literalist, nor does it mean that such a person accepts that the Grand Canyon, or any particular feature, is the result of a Noachian flood. And after all, the term "Grand Canyon" does not appear in the christian Bible, so even a literalist need not believe in a Noachian origin of the Canyon.
To the best of my knowledge, there is no serious suggestion in scientific circles for a largely Catastrophist origin for the Canyon, much less a Noachian one. However, there are some geographic features where a Catastrophic origin has come to be accepted. See Channeled Scablands for one such case. However, note that this is in no way a Biblical explanation. DES (talk) 16:49, 31 March 2016 (UTC)