the grand canyon couldn't be carved by a very small river of water. and, you can trace the path of least resistance - when there was a huge amount of water.
The grand canyon wasn't carved by a small river because you can trace the path of the least resistance? Water always takes the path of least resistance, be it a small river or a global flood.
Yet there is a difference. If a global flood takes the least resistance then that means the surface of the water is flat. Or actually since the total planet is flooded and the planet does have some differences in gravity, following the gravitational field of the earth.
If even the tip of mount everest is under water then water has no 'path to follow'.
There is also no water that is flowing from one point to another, the whole planet is covered with water, wherever it may have come from.
Whatever you want to believe, you can't deny that the grand canyon looks exactly like it was carved out by a small river over a very long period of time.
I saw that you even changed your mind on the grand canyon being carved out during the flood saying that 'god created the grand canyon looking old'. Why, how, when?
There are fossils in the grand canyon rock. In your world view fossils were put down during the flood, right? So how is that all possible?
what does this tell you? that no water was involved? the river suddenly became huge
But then there was no gorge at all yet. Just a flat surface. Water follows the path of least resistance. So why did it cut out a canyon? The water would quickly spread out over a wide area.
Also, a huge river doesn't cause deeper erosion then a small one. Ack, what am I doing. You are just playing games. You know I am right but you just act this way for some strange reason.
Maybe you seek attention or something. And I stupidly fall for it.
I shouldn't be so naive and trusting. You just aren't worth my time.