Argon dating website
History, human or geological, represents our hypothesis, couched in terms of past events, devised to explain our present-day observations. Fundamentally, they are two: (1) We assume that natural laws are invariant with time (2) We exclude hypotheses of the violation of natural laws by Divine Providence, or other forms of supernaturalism. 31) The principle of uniformity, if it has any meaning at all in modern science, includes no more than these two principles.
Indeed, most modern scholars of the subject have concluded that uniformitarianism today is simply the application of the scientific method to nature and that the term is so confusing it should be abandoned (for example, Gould, 59, p. Thus, in assuming and then condemning constant rates for geologic processes, Morris and Parker (97) and their colleagues have set up a straw man based on an obsolete historical definition of uniformity that no modern geologist would accept.
This conclusion follows from the obvious fact that: (1) they are less likely to have been affected by initial concentrations or positions other than “zero”; (2) the assumption that the system was a “closed system” is more likely to be valid for a short time than for a long time; (3) the assumption that the process rate was constant is also more likely to be valid for a short time than for a long time.Thus, it will suffice to summarize briefly the evidence against Barnes’ propositions.To a first approximation, the Earth’s field is that of a dipole with the lines of flux emerging at the poles.These calculations occur throughout the literature of creation “science” (e.g., 13, 77, 92, 116, 135), and they have been conveniently tabulated by Morris (93, 95) and Morris and Parker (97) (Table 10).Concerning this tabulation, Morris and Parker (97) make the following statement: There are, as a matter of fact, scores of worldwide processes which give ages far too young to suit the standard Evolution Model.