http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/614600/uniformitarianism
excerpt:
“The idea that the laws that govern geologic processes have not changed during the history of the Earth were articulated by the 18th-century Scottish geologist James Hutton, who in 1785 presented his ideas—later published in two volumes as Theory of the Earth (1795)—at meetings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. In this work Hutton showed that the Earth had a long history and that this history could be interpreted in terms of processes observed at the present, of which he gave examples. He showed, for instance, how soils were formed by the weathering of rocks and how layers of sediment accumulated. He stated that there was no need of any preternatural cause to explain the geologic record. Hutton’s proposal challenged the concept of a biblical Earth (with a history of some 6,000 years) that was created especially to be a home for man; the effect of his ideas on the learned world can be compared only with the earlier revolution in thought brought about by Nicolaus Copernicus, Johannes Kepler, and Galileo when they displaced the concept of a universe centred on the Earth with the concept of a solar system centred on the Sun. Both advances challenged existing thought and were fiercely resisted for many years. In the publication Principles of Geology, 3 vol. (1830–33), the Scottish geologist Sir Charles Lyell deciphered the history of the Earth employing Huttonian principles and made available a host of new geologic evidence in support of the view that physical laws were permanent and that any form of supernaturalism can be rejected. Lyell’s work in turn profoundly influenced Charles Darwin, who recognized Lyell as having produced a revolution in science...”
They were simply working on theories using what information was available to them at the time. Lyell followed Hutton, and Darwin needed the long spans of time to explain his theory of evolution. The catastrophists understood that the earth wasn’t created six thousand years ago...what was created was the landscape, not the globe.
No one deserves to be called a liar imo. It’s a matter of interpretation, and clinging to dogma. In the case of Darwin he had to close his eyes to what he saw.
Gee Fred, then you would you prefer to believe there are no liars? I've read all I care to about Darwin and Lyell and have come to the conclusion they consistently and deliberately misrepresented and/or ignored evidence that presented itself. Not just once, but over and over; again and again. Would you prefer to label them discombobulators??? Sugar coating what to me is obvious doesn't change anything. Look at the evidence.