Conflict over the real life of the Grand Canyon

A new study may be controversial about the exact time of forming the famous Grand Canyon.

Rock formations can be formed the way scientists think for millions of years. The traditional view is that this huge mountain range was completed about 6 million years ago and the Colorado River is almost the only river that carves Arizona's rocky mountains. But recent research suggests that the western edge of the Grand Canyon began forming 17 million years ago , due to slow erosion before the river appeared.

Scientists also discovered that the eastern half was formed within the last 4 million years - not a figure of 6 million years - when the river was ingrained in the Colorado Plateau.

Scientists produce evidence-based research on the cliffs of caves. The study, led by Victor Polyak, and team at the University of New Mexico, will be published in the journal Science and is expected to become a controversial topic.

New technology

Until now, attempts to describe the Grand Canyon's formation are based on geological events such as rocky or rocky sediments. But according to the authors, that data is only reliable within a million years ago.

Polyak and his colleagues explain that when water cuts into rock layers north of Arizona - forming cliffs - the surrounding water layer also seeps along the rock layers. So they explored the calcite ore located in the cave on the edge of a permeable layer, called speleothem.

Polyak and his colleagues knew that speleothem formed in areas with seepage water: they saw similar structures in caves along the southwestern desert of the United States. The Grand Canyon's speleothems contain tiny traces of lead and uranium, and the proportions of these elements can reveal the time and location of the structure.

Studying carbonate ores at the location of leachate or nearby makes scientists conclude the oldest rock canyon in the western part and extends east thanks to erosion.

The Colorado River is deeply embedded in the limestone cliff of the Grand Canyon.Caves on the cliffs similar to the stone structure at the port have led some scientists to conclude that some parts of the canyon have a longer life expectancy.(Photo: John Doug Powell / Science)

Reaction of geologists

Geologists studying Grand Canyon still focus on geological evidence as a sign of volcanic activity, to estimate the age of the canyon. New methods based on cave ores have not been accepted by many scientists.

One of them is Ivo Lucchitta, geologist in Flagstaff, Arizona. Lucchitta said he was " angry " at the new scientific work. Lucchitta also stated that he will join other Grand Canyon geologists who oppose Science because he has not yet seriously appraised the new work. He said: 'If these authors really want to contribute, they have to prove to us why the previous inferences are wrong, and why their reasoning and data are more accurate.'

An important discovery?

But according to Wayne Ranney, geologist at Flagstaff and author of the Carving Grand Canyon, scientists have touched on the most controversial issue of the time and formation of the Grand. Canyon.

Ranney said he will mention the new idea in the next edition of his book.'I would be surprised if this work does not arise in conflict with other canyon geologists, because it coincides with recent emerging ideas.'

But the authors say they have only used this isotope technology to describe the history of the canyon. Hundreds of ore may still exist in the entire canyon. According to co-author Carol Hill: 'Ore can be a potential source of information to recreate the history of the canyon, with enough certainty to explain the many complex cases of canyons . ruptures, slots mountains and stratigraphic or volcanic activities. '

Although Hill and his colleagues can solve part of the work, a large part of this work may be ceded to a future generation of geologists.'We only do road marking, because this has never been studied before.'