Those pesky brachiopods, causing problems again. They're fossilised at the top of Mt. Everest and guess what, they are fossilised in layers of the Grand Canyon too (specifically the Tapeats, Bright Angel, and Muav formations). As has been pointed out, it is notable that they anchor to a selected spot when they are still larvae and thereafter grow in place.

The question being, how could a fixed, bottom-dwelling animal find the time and the food to grow to full size while it was under a steady stream of settling sediment? If it anchored itself at dawn, it would be under 15 feet of sediment by nightfall. In case you want to argue that they were washed there, you need to be aware that there are ways for scientists to tell whether this is the case -- see here and here for starters.

Speaking of fossils, other questions remain. There are no fossils of advanced organisms in the "pre-Flood rocks" of the Grand Canyon, just primitive life such as stromatolites. Weren't there supposed to be other life forms around that God had created? Also, there are no fossils of large Mesozoic or Cenozoic animals anywhere in the Grand Canyon. All of the rocks are Paleozoic, and all have only Paleozoic fossils in them. The fossils are also sorted in the same way that they are across the world.

Science can explain all of these things. Is there a creationist model that can do so? I'm assuming that the creationists here believe in the standard model that the flood deposited the sediment from which the Grand Canyon was supposedly carved as the waters receded. If this is the case, maybe you can also explain to me why the walls did not slump in the process, as the rock would not have solidified. If this is not what you believe, maybe you can clarify what you do believe actually happened.