Rock of Ages!!!

The history of Charles Lyell and uniformitarianism
"Lyell entered Exeter College, Oxford in 1816, and attended William Buckland's lectures. He graduated B.A. second class in classics, December 1819, and M.A. 1821.[2][3] After graduation he took up law as a profession, entering Lincoln's Inn in 1820. He completed a circuit through rural England, where he could observe geological phenomena. In 1821 he attended Robert Jameson's lectures in Edinburgh, and visited Gideon Mantell at Lewes, in Sussex. In 1823 he was elected joint secretary of the Geological Society. As his eyesight began to deteriorate, he turned to geology as a full-time profession.[3] His first paper, "On a recent formation of freshwater limestone in Forfarshire", was presented in 1822.[3] By 1827, he had abandoned law and embarked on a geological career that would result in fame and the general acceptance of uniformitarianism, a working out of the idea proposed by James Hutton a few decades earlier."
Wikipedia "Charles lyell"


  It is important to nottice that Lyell was not trained as much of a scientist himself, but more educated in the field of being a lawyer. So most of His work was based upon the findings of James Hutton and his theory of plutonism.  Evolutionist are fond of criticizing academic credentials even though the founders were soo unacredited.

"Plutonism (or vulcanism) is the geologic theory that the rocks forming the Earth were formed in fire by volcanic activity, with a continuing gradual process of weathering and erosion wearing away rocks, which were then deposited on the sea bed, re-formed into layers of sedimentary rock by heat and pressure, and raised again. It proposed that basalt was solidified molten magma. It was named after Pluto, the classical ruler of the underworld, or alternatively after Vulcan, the ancient Roman god of fire and volcanoes."
"The Frenchmen Compte de Buffon (a Roman Catholic, but likely a secret skeptic) postulated that the earth had gradually cooled from a molten lava state over at least 70,000 years and Pierre Laplace (a strong atheist) imagined that the solar system had slowly condensed from a gaseous nebula. The German Abraham Werner and the Scottish James Hutton (both deists) developed geological theories that the sedimentary strata formed slowly over millions of years. "
The 19th century scriptural geologists: historical background by Dr. Terry Mortenson, AiG–USA

"The catastrophists dominated the first 35 years or so. They believed that the geological/fossil record could only be explained by imagining that there had been several or many global or regional floods in earth history. George Cuvier, a famous French comparative anatomist and nominal Protestant, published his influential Theory of the Earth in 1813 (English version; the original in French was published a year earlier in Paris under a slightly different title). From studying the fossils found in the rocks in and around Paris he believed that the earth had suffered at least three or four floods, the last of which was Noah’s Flood."
The 19th century scriptural geologists: historical background by Dr. Terry Mortenson, AiG–USA


"  The theory was first proposed before 1750, by Abbé Anton Moro who had studied volcanic islands, and was subsequently developed by James Hutton as part of his Theory of the Earth published in 1788. It contested Abraham Werner's neptunist theory which proposed that the Earth had formed from a mass of water and suspended material which had formed rocks as layers of deposited sediment which became the continents when the water retreated, further layers being deposited by floods and some volcanic activity." Wikipedia" plutonism"

"Uniformitarianism is the assumption that the same natural laws and processes that operate in the universe now, have always operated in the universe in the past and apply everywhere in the universe. It has included the gradualistic concept that "the present is the key to the past" and is functioning at the same rates. Uniformitarianism has been a key principle of geology and virtually all fields of science, but naturalism's modern geologists, while accepting that geology has occurred across deep time, no longer hold to a strict gradualism.
Uniformitarianism was formulated by Scottish naturalists in the late 18th century, starting with the work of the geologist James Hutton, which was refined by John Playfair and popularised by Charles Lyell's Principles of Geology in 1830.[1] The term uniformitarianism was coined by William Whewell, who also coined the term catastrophism for the idea that Earth was shaped by a series of sudden, short-lived, violent events.[2]"
Wikipedia "uniformitarianism"
"The contributions he made to correct understandings of ignaceous rocks is large. but his outstanding acheivement was formulation of the uniformitarian principle, which states that natural agents now at work on and within the earth have repeated with general uniformity through immensely long periods of time."
"Hutton reasoning inductively from a wealth of evidence, concluded that the earth dates from the remote past ; he could see no vestige of a beginning- no prospect of an end."
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA Geology: B. 18th century

Hebrews 11:3 "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."

naturalistic assumptions: Uniformitarianism most obvious operates under the worldview of naturalism.  There is nothing fundamentally different about our ancient past.

  One thing of interest is that Sutton's theory provides no origin of the earth.  But how does the earth exist if it was never caused?  We know the earth is limited and that it changes.  If this theory is designed to accomodate an eternal earth, how can it give explanation for the age of the earth?

   Essentially this leads one to a pantheistic worldview.  The idea that matter is eternal.  This could not be the case.  Matter is not eternal due to entropy.  Because energy escapes and matter breaks down.
So the gravity and rotation of the earth would eventually break down.  So at somepoint, something had to get the earth started.  The naturalist answer for this is in the "big bang theory".  Which would be a starting point but would still require the miraculous to take place to have nothing to turn into something.  However if there is a required intervention wouldn't this theory fall apart?  Because there can not be something supernatural in an solely natural world.
  So originally uniformatarianism descended from a form of pantheism.  Then it was adapted to a form of deism. The ages are kept at a long range in order to support this theory; also they are used to accompany the idea of biological evolution. And vice versa.

Obvious bias
Lyell was not a geologist by training. he was a lawyer. Which is the essence of bias. Lawyers are paid to deliver a onesided arguement.
"I devoured Lamark... his theories delighted me... I am glad that he has been courageous enough and logical enough to admit that his argument, if pushed as far as it must go, if worth anything, would prove that men may have come from the Ourang-Outang. But after all, what changes species may really undergo!... That the Earth is quite as old as he supposes, has long been my creed..."Lyell K. 1881. The life and letters of Sir Charles Lyell. 2 vols, London. vol. 1 p. 168
  Lyell had even stated that his goal was to "free the science from moses" life and letters and journals john murray 1881

1Corinthians 15:39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.
40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.



An unproven system:
If we were to find the system of uniformitarianism to be true, we would have to find Lyell's model of geological strata as consistent across the face of the earth.  When in fact we have not found this. In fact there are few locations on the earth that have this specific order and we do not have.
"Whatever the method or approach, the geologist must take cognizance of the following facts... There is no place on earth where a complete record of the rocks is present....  To reconstruct the history of the earth, scattered bits of information from thousands of locations all over the world must be placed together.  The results will be at best only a very incomplete record.  If the complete history of the earth is compared to an encyclopedia of 30 volumes, then we can seldom hope to find even one comeplete volume in a given area. Sometimes only a few chapters, perhaps only a paragraph or two, will be the total geological contribution of a region; indeed, we are often reduced to studying scattering bits of information more nearly comparable to a few words of letters."  Brown Monnet and Stovel  Introduction to Geology

Luke 19:40 And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.

Ties with evolution
"I devoured Lamark... his theories delighted me... I am glad that he has been courageous enough and logical enough to admit that his argument, if pushed as far as it must go, if worth anything, would prove that men may have come from the Ourang-Outang. But after all, what changes species may really undergo!... That the Earth is quite as old as he supposes, has long been my creed..." [16]"
Lyell K. 1881. The life and letters of Sir Charles Lyell. 2 vols, London. vol. 1 p. 168
"If I had stated... the possibility of the introduction or origination of fresh species being a natural, in contradistinction to a miraculous process, I should have raised a host of prejudices against me, which are unfortunately opposed at every step to any philosopher who attempts to address the public on these mysterious subjects".[18]
Lyell to William Whewell, March 7, 1837. In Lyell K. 1881. The life and letters of Sir Charles Lyell. 2 vols, London. vol. 2 p. 5

In dating the age of the fossils, they use circular reasoning having the rock layers dated by the fossils.


You may love luci but where is desi?
  When we find a fossil or skelaton what can we prove?
Other than the fact that it used to be a living thing.
   We have no proof that luci had any relative and we have no proof that lucy was not simply a mutant.
If the geological column has been debunked then how do we know its age?
More important is the question of "where is the missing link?" Because now if we accept a connection between apes and man  how do we link them with another species?
  Now I am not dealing with an exhaustive argument of lucy.   Many point out that this creature was a knuckle walker,  that the knee is not original.  That many paintings portray human  parts when the skelatons shows no evidence.
  What I am saying is that if all these things are proven accurate on the evolution case they still have not proven to have a valid case for this being mankinds ancestor.
Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.



Proper Logic
A. Science bases it's information upon the obersvation of present facts. 
B. History bases it's information based on the obseervation of recorded facts
C. Since Science focuses on observation of the present and history observes the past.  History has a more reliable information concerning the past.
D.  If Uniformitarianism is evidentially neutral and it does not have historical support. (human history is limited to 5-6,000 years) then we need to look to the best historical evidence.


The crafty snake
There was a snake early on who changed every thing! ......
Not that guy!

Titaniboa!!
This massive snake fossil ranging from 50-150ft(estimation because we are unaware if the complete fossil was preserved)  has stirred up some controversy in the scientific community.
Because a giant cold blooded animal would require  very warm weather.  even in columbia the weather would have had to be about 10 degrees hotter.
There are other giant repties in this record of fossils as well. For instance a giant aligator and tortoise.  So many scientist are convinced that this proves the climate there was warmer.  But if this is true then it proves that giant cold blooded reptiles existed in the past. 
Previous scientists under a uniformitarian philosophy would not draw this conclusion.  They took the millions of dinosaur fossils and claimed that they were actually warm blooded. in order to keep with this school of thought.  This is why we heard so much about dinosaurs being linked in evolution with birds.
But now there is nothing inconcisstent and dinosaurs were probably cold blooded. therefore the earth was warmer.  Hence the natural processes of the earth were not uniformitarian.
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/How-Titanoboa-the-40-Foot-Long-Snake-Was-Found.html#ixzz2B52GpyOm Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/How-Titanoboa-the-40-Foot-Long-Snake-Was-Found.html#ixzz2B4zC2L4G

Not only do we see the need for a warmer climate but we also see the need for a higher oxygen level due to the findings of giant insect fossils.  Insects breath through there skin and could not sustain enough oxygen for a large body.
"Reign of the giant insects ended with the evolution of birds
June 04, 2012
By Tim Stephens
 "   Giant insects ruled the prehistoric skies during periods when Earth's atmosphere was rich in oxygen. Then came the birds. After the evolution of birds about 150 million years ago, insects got smaller despite rising oxygen levels, according to a new study by scientists at the University of California, Santa Cruz. ..."
"This fossil insect wing (Stephanotypus schneideri) from the period about 300 million years ago when insects reached their greatest sizes, measures 19.5 centimeters (almost eight inches) long. The largest species of that time were even bigger, with wings 30 centimeters long. For comparison, the inset shows the wing of the largest dragonfly of the past 65 million years. ..."
http://news.ucsc.edu/2012/06/giant-insects.html
^{Genesis 6:4a "}There were giants in the earth in those days;"

keep it in the canopy!
Why was the atmosphere so different?
While creationist scientist have different opinions.  I believe the bible has the answer to this as well.  In the creation story there was a canopy over the earth.  I believe this was a cloud of ice/hydrogen particle.  Similar to the ice clouds over the planet urinus.  God had perfectly arranged them there to provide a utopian environment.  That was rich in oxygen and heat without the harmful radiation we recieve nowadays.

This is not simply a new theory.  This was a historic observation by many tribes and natians and cultures in the ancient world.
"The notion of the sky as a solid object (rather than just an atmospheric expanse) was widespread among both ancient civilisations and primitive cultures, including ancient Greece, Egypt, China, India, native Americans, Australian aborigines, and also early Christians.[25]
The sky is depicted as a solid dome arched over the earth in both Mesopotamian and Indo-European mythologies (e.g., creation myths) and poetry. The Sumerian sky-god An ruled these firmament-like "heavens", which the wind-god had separated from the flat disc of the earth below, and there were primordial seas above the firmament. Ancient Indians also believed in a solid sky: "Firm is the sky and firm is the earth," says the Rig Veda.[25] This approach to cosmology is probably universal, and is also encountered in mythologies of the New World." Wikipedia firmament

Job 37:18 Hast thou with him spread out the sky, which is strong, and as a molten looking glass?

    Give the Bible a chance!
  The Bible is the most historical of the ancient accounts. 
A.  It has the longest record.  (most histories do not exeed 5,000 years)
B.  Everything is linked in specific geneologies. 
C.  It has been confirmed in many cases by archaeology (a classic example is the record of the hittites which scholars denied.)
D.  The point of a global flooded is corroborated universally. (virtually every ancient culture agrees to this much.
E.  historic geology) the early geologist assumed a catastrophic flood.
all the earth has marine biology in the fossil records. 

Obviously If you believe The scripture is the Word of God, You are more likely to hold this as true.  Also if you reject scriptures you will not like the idea of accepting such an incredible event.

To this I ask you the following is it the logic that is the problem here... or is it the consequences?  If the World was once destroyed it could be so again.  If the biblical account is true, it may mean that the God of the Bible is real and that I am accountable to Him.  You may look at the earth and find all of the destruction caused by rejecting the God of the Bible. And if this is bother you I encourage you to research www.biblesmack.net  and read what the scripture says about salvation.

1 Peter3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
22 Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.