For uniformitarianism to hold water, you need things to happen slowly, uniformly and over very long periods of time. What if I told you a volcanic eruption that happened in 1980 in the state of Washington DISPROVES the notion that deep time is necessary for significant changes in landscapes? The eruption of Mt. Saint Helen in 1980 proves landscapes, including canyon's, can form virtually overnight. Why does that matter? The THEORY of evolution is built on the principal of uniformitarianism. If uniformitarianism isn't true, the theory of evolution is on shaky ground. Let's go further.
What is Uniformitarianism?
Uniformitarianism states the "the present is the key to the past" (ref 1). Meaning, whatever we observe today can be applied to the past "uniformly." For example, if my backyard ravine loses 1 inch every five years, according to uniformitarianism, I can conclude the one inch per five years has been consistent for all time. I can use that erosion rate to determine how my yard looked in the past and use that rate to predict what my yard will look like in the future.
Who came up with Uniformitarianism?
This theory is credited mainly to Charles Lyell, who published a book called Principles of Geology in 1830 (ref 1).
How does Uniformitarianism relate to evolution?
When Darwin was just TWENTY-TWO years old, he set off on a fishing expedition to the Galapagos Island in 1831 (ref 2). Darwin is said to have been profoundly impacted by the "millions of years" proposed by Charles Lyell, even bringing his now famous book with him on the journey (ref 3). Darwin published his book, On the Origin of Species in 1859, which essentially takes Lyell's theory of millions of years and applies "deep time" to the origins of life (ref 6). You might say, uniformitarianism is the foundation for the theory of evolution.
At this point, you may be thinking.. well what about a big storm? A flood? A tornado? Well, according to uniformitarianism, these types of events are not the drive of landscapes.
To an evolutionist, the Grand Canyon is proof of millions or billions of years. Small layers forming over millions of years that just happen to be perfectly level, showing no signs of erosion or weathering. To a creationist, the grand canyon is proof of the catastrophic flood described in the bible. Huge amounts of water laying down sediment in very little time, explaining the uniformity of the layers and the consistency in sediment layers on continents all over the world. Hard to "prove" either side right since no one was there when the Grand Canyon was formed. Making its formation neither OBSERVALBE or REPEATABLE. The basis of the scientific method.
"On May 18, 1980, the eruption at Mount St. Helens challenged secular geologists´ assumption of uniformitarianism (the belief that the same slow processes of change have continued throughout earth history). Canyons and rock layers were formed over hours, days, or a few months." (ref 4).
The volcanic eruption at Mount Saint Helens provided an observable event that giving us key insight into the non-observable past. In an article titled, "Mount Saint Helen Refutes Evolution," a former evolutionist explains how evidence from ICR’s research of the 1980s eruptions in Washington State led him to change his mind on evolution. The biblical account of the flood as the explanation of many of the earth's features now appearing more reasonable than uniformitarianism in light of Mt. Saint Helens. The article states, "the Mount St. Helens events only needed hours and months to form the same features found in sedimentary rocks around the world. Common features include:
— Sharp, flat contacts between layers — Larger particles toward the bottom of a rock bed — Cross-beds — Steep-walled canyons — Drainage systems — Material moved far away before becoming part of new rock — De-limbed, sorted, and reburied logs — Volcanic ash mixed with mud and hardened into rock (ref 5).
After observing what actually happened at Mt Saint Helen, there is irrefutable evidence that major changes in landscapes can happen rapidly. Further, these land features are not unique, bringing about the obvious question. Can catastrophe explain other geographic locations with similar features? You decide.
Comments