don't accept the mega-floods scenario. Standard geology needs to explain the land form somehow, but they don't have huge electrical events in their tool box, so it must have been water, and huge amounts of it.
Huge blocks of basalt traveled three to six miles before eventually coming to rest high above the river.
They can never show numerical simulations of such action, the laminar flow model applies no matter how much water is flowing, there is no erosion at the base or the sides of the channel, and no large blocks could ever be washed miles downstream. The initial surge you might say, but they can't numerically model that either, so they just resort to such a huge ice dam burst, knowing that nobody is ever going to question their models, these guys are the experts after all.
Starting with the Lake Missoula model, and following some of the links from the Wiki page, it seems to me that assumptions have been piled on assumptions, beginning with a theory about the formation of the great ripples.
The Glacial Lake Missoula National Natural Landmark is located about 68 miles northwest of Missoula, Montana at the north end of the Camas Prairie Valley, just east of Montana Highway 382 and Macfarlane Ranch. It was designated as a National Natural Landmark in 1966 because it contains the great ripples, (often measuring 25 to 50 feet (7.6 to 15.2 m) high and 300 feet (91 m) long), that served as a strong supporting element for J Harlen Bretz's contention that Washington State's Channeled Scablands were formed by repeated cataclysmic floods over only about 2,000 years, rather than through the millions of years of erosion that had been previously assumed.
Their whole mega-flood model seems to be based on the interpretation of those ripples being from water action, but again, an assumption.
Rivers are a very confusing and complex issue for geologists, and their ages can not be determined with any degree of accuracy.
Strange Course of Idaho's Rivers
A couple of wiki links:
If it somehow satisfies ones model of reality to believe in the mega floods, erosion by glaciers or water and wind, and the dozens of other assumptions and unprovable processes, well, that's understandable, as the alternative is the formation of all these features by electromagnetic forces on a scale that must lead to the questioning of the survival of any living things in these areas, and if the same EM processes are responsible for similar devastation and shaping of the landforms observed all over the planet, then the theory of evolution, and the origins of all life on Earth must be cast in great doubt, and the TB site, for good reason, probably does not want to go anywhere near such consideration.
Could I suggest that the story of plate movements etc is all assumption.
You could to me. Another case of pseudoscience being somehow accepted as factual. Thinking big is one thing, thinking the correct kind of big is another.
It is very difficult to think really really big and long term, but once You realise the basis of creation, which is most definately not this stupid big bang crap,
With a Vedic model, then there was not one big bang, and as each Sun comes into existence, creating its own mini-universe, there is not so much a big bang as a big flare, and the associated matter creation, and the shaping of that matter into all the objects that fill that 'little' universe.
That what is actually occuring is huge transmutations caused by the galatic flows of consciousness ( commonly called plasma)
A little beyond the present scope of my investigations, I am only looking at the physical level, just trying to figure out the machinery, but I certainly do think about the realms above the physical level, that perhaps we are all Beings of Light, though not light as in photons, and that the Sun is perhaps a Being of light at its core, and we are Children of the Sun, or of the One.
Children of the Sun, Offspring of the Stars
http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/sun ... e-jvmr.htm
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller