[King Prout]

but it seems to fit with the well-known inaccuracies of various dating methodolgies

actually, no. not even slightly.

[Lexinom]

I will repeat this part:

Some fairly major assumptions about constancy have to be made - all of which begin assuming the conclusion (Lyell's geological timeframe) as the premise. They are assumptions not subject to falsification, since to do so under the scientific method would require a time machine.

To take a page from stands2reason's book, if it isn't faslifiable, it isn't science.