Who is Andrew Snelling, and what were his beliefs regarding the formation of the Grand Canyon?

Andrew Snelling is a geologist holding the conviction that the Grand Canyon was rapidly formed by Noah's flood, as described in the Book of Genesis. He sought to extract rock samples from the Grand Canyon to provide evidence supporting a young-Earth creationist viewpoint.

Why did the National Parks Service deny Andrew Snelling's request to collect rock samples from the Grand Canyon?

The National Parks Service denied Andrew Snelling's permit application to collect rock samples within the Grand Canyon. Their decision was influenced by expert reviewers who raised concerns about the scientific validity and rigor of his research proposal. One reviewer, Karl Karlstrom, pointed out deficiencies in Snelling's proposal, citing its lack of scientific rigor and outdated references.

What evidence was Andrew Snelling hoping to find in the Grand Canyon to support his theory?

Andrew Snelling believed that extracting rock samples from the Colorado River banks within the Grand Canyon could prove that the canyon was formed by Noah's flood, a catastrophic event. He proposed to collect approximately 60 rock samples, each weighing about 250 grams, to challenge the established geological timeline.

What were the central arguments in Andrew Snelling's lawsuit against the National Parks Service, and what are the broader implications of this legal battle?

Andrew Snelling's lawsuit alleges religious discrimination by the National Parks Service, claiming they prevented him from conducting legitimate research due to his religious beliefs. Represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, Snelling argues that the Parks Service unfairly obstructed his scientific inquiry. This raises questions about the balance between scientific scrutiny and religious freedom in government-regulated research.

Who is Karl Karlstrom, and what specific criticisms did he have regarding Andrew Snelling's research proposal?

Karl Karlstrom, a geologist from the University of New Mexico, critiqued Andrew Snelling's research proposal, highlighting that it was not well-written, up-to-date, or well-referenced. Karlstrom also questioned Snelling's scientific track record, further undermining the credibility of his research. This critique played a significant role in the National Parks Service's decision to reject Snelling's permit application.

Surreal digital illustration of the Grand Canyon flood receding with courtroom overlay

Noah's Flood on Trial: The Geologist Who Sued Over the Grand Canyon's Secrets

Elliot Brynn in Law & Justice August 2025 • 4 min read.

"Delve into the legal battle where science, religion, and the Grand Canyon's origins collide."

The Grand Canyon, a breathtaking scar carved into the heart of Arizona, is not just a geological wonder but also a battleground for one of the most enduring debates in modern society: the age of the Earth and the interpretation of its history. At the center of this conflict stands Andrew Snelling, an Australian-born geologist with a PhD from the University of Sydney and a firm belief in a young Earth.

Snelling's conviction that the biblical flood of Noah was responsible for the rapid formation of the Grand Canyon led him to a legal confrontation with the United States National Parks Service. His lawsuit, filed after the Parks Service denied him permits to collect rock samples within the canyon, claimed religious discrimination and ignited a firestorm of controversy.

This is the story of that lawsuit—a clash between scientific inquiry, deeply held religious beliefs, and the policies governing one of America's most iconic landscapes. It’s a journey into the heart of a debate that challenges our understanding of time, history, and the very ground beneath our feet.

The Geologist's Quest: Unearthing Evidence for a Young Earth

Surreal digital illustration of the Grand Canyon flood receding with courtroom overlay

Andrew Snelling isn't just any geologist; he's a "young-Earth creationist." This means he adheres to a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis, believing that the Earth was created in six days and is only a few thousand years old—a stark contrast to the billions of years accepted by mainstream science. For Snelling, the Grand Canyon isn't the product of millions of years of slow erosion, but rather the result of a catastrophic event: Noah's flood.

His plan was simple: extract around 60 rock samples, each weighing approximately 250 grams, from the banks of the Colorado River as it flows through the Grand Canyon. These samples, he believed, held the key to proving his theory and challenging the established geological timeline. However, his application for a permit to collect these rocks was met with resistance from the National Parks Service.

November 2013: Snelling submits his initial research proposal, notably omitting any mention of creationism.
Reviewers' Concerns: Appointed experts flagged the proposal as scientifically invalid, suggesting alternative sites for similar rocks.
Karl Karlstrom's Critique: A geologist from the University of New Mexico pointed out deficiencies in Snelling's proposal, citing its lack of scientific rigor and outdated references.
March 2014: The Parks Service formally rejects Snelling's proposal.
Legal Action: Snelling files a lawsuit, alleging religious discrimination after the Parks Service fails to respond to an amended proposal.

The Parks Service's decision wasn't arbitrary. Reviewers appointed to assess Snelling's proposal raised serious concerns about its scientific validity. Karl Karlstrom, a geologist from the University of New Mexico, highlighted that Snelling's proposal was "not well-written, up-to-date, or well-referenced." He also noted Snelling's lack of a consistent scientific track record, further undermining the credibility of his research.

A Legal and Scientific Stalemate

The lawsuit filed by Andrew Snelling against the National Parks Service remains a contentious issue. Represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian legal organization, Snelling claims that the government discriminated against him based on his religious beliefs. The ADF lawyer, Gary McCaleb, accused the Parks Service of "stonewalling [Snelling] for three years," arguing that it's fundamentally wrong to prevent a qualified scientist from conducting legitimate research.