Dr. Andrew Snelling, a research geologist who serves as the director of research at AiG, was told that he would not be allowed to get anywhere near the Grand Canyon to perform his work because the results could undermine what the park tells its guests about how this natural wonder of the world was formed. Dr. Snelling believes that it was an act of God, while the National Park Service holds an evolutionary view of its existence.
According to WorldNetDaily (WND), the Alliance Defending Freedom, a group that fights on behalf of religious freedom, has taken up a lawsuit on Dr. Snelling's behalf that seeks a remedy in stopping this oppression. Dr. Snelling should be allowed to gather samples at folds within the canyon where all the layers were bent, but not shattered because the rocks were still soft as they folded, which suggests that the canyon's formation happened abruptly as opposed to over the course of about 450 million years.
"Apparently, Dr. Snelling's most recent research project on behalf of a high-profile group (AiG) was deemed a threat to the prevailing viewpoint of the canyon's formation and timing," reads a statement issued by AiG, the group representing Dr. Snelling in the lawsuit. "The language used by park officials and its reviewers to describe Dr. Snelling's proposal decry that a Christian and creationist seeks to do the research."
The allegation that Dr. Snelling's work represents a threat to the prevailing view that the Grand Canyon is an evolutionary wonder is only valid if that evolutionary theory is flawed to begin with. If it's a set-in-stone fact as the National Park Service and its allies claim, then why worry about Dr. Snelling's work? It will certainly be disproven through rational discourse, right?
The United States was founded upon the idea that civil discourse and free speech are to be encouraged rather than stifled. This is especially true for scientific investigation, which should welcome opinions of all stripes and be open to opposing theories. When it's doesn't, it represents a religious cult known as scientism, of which fanatics like Neil deGrasse Tyson and Bill Nye are today's most notorious poster-boys.
Dr. Snelling has every right to enter Grand Canyon National Park and perform whatever type of scientific research he chooses. It is a public park maintained in the public interest, after all, which means that anyone who is there to respect the space and use it in accordance with park guidelines is, and should be, welcome.
"The samples I have been blocked from collecting in the GCNP are to be subjected to routine lab processing and investigations any good scientist would perform," Dr. Snelling told media sources, adding that he shouldn't have to undergo "a religious litmus test" in order to exercise his right to engage in independent scientific inquiry. "The results are to be openly reported for all scientists to draw their own conclusions, whether or not they agree with my worldview interpretation of the history of the Earth."
It's important to note that Dr. Snelling's previous work has been published in peer-reviewed journals, meaning other scientists have given it proper scrutiny, as they should. He also has many years of both field and laboratory experience involving both theoretical and practical geological research.
Sources for this article include: