Pre-Darwin does not mean only prior to when he published "Origin...". Darwin was born in 1809. Any point in time prior to 1809 is pre-Darwin by definition.
And "Geologia ovvero de fossilibus" by Ulisse Aldrovandi,was published in the 16th century and it was a modern approach to geology.
You have translated this work from the medieval Latin and discovered pre-Lyellian uniformitarianism did you?
You can deny these facts forever, but it doesn't change them. You can also keep your abitrary assertion that 1809 somehow marks the advent of modern thought. This makes no sense given the information already provided to you.
It is little wonder that evolutionists who are at their core unhinged from the search for truth also find themselves unable to follow a discussion cogently. Your link benchmarked the emergence of the formal discipline of study of what is known today as geology. It is populated by those who engage in formal study of the science who are known as "geologists." As I originally stated and your own link affirmed, this formalization all happened in the 19th century – just as I said.
Again I ask, where were you educated? Given your utter dependence on ad hominem, I'd have to say it was Harvard or Wellesley College.
I completed my undergraduate and graduate studies at prestigious American institutions. Neither Harvard nor Wellesley are to be counted among them. Possibly what is a more relevant measure of the value of one’s education and knowledge is the marketplace itself. After 25 years in my career, I own a pharmaceutical-development consulting firm, where my opinions and knowledge on scientific matters are sought by clients who are only too willing to pay my $250/hr billing rate. I also hold patents in synthetic chemistries and pharmaceutical formulations, and am a published author in both areas as well as in analytical methods development.
Assuming anyone would pay you for your opinion on anything beyond possibly a focus group surveying opinions on, say, the latest in baby food cuisine, what’s your bill rate and who’s paying you how much to listen to your cut’n’paste fairytale command of “scientism”?
I suspect most wouldn't give you a bent dime for anything you’ve posted here, if for no other reason than your position is so poorly researched – not to mention how in stumbling over your own argument you wound up making mine instead.
By the way do you like to eat your baby peas: strained or pureed?
Actually you are totally wrong. The family name Darwin goes back hundreds of years before Charles was born. So technically Pre-Darwin refers to any point before the 1500's by definition
Which Darwin? The first Darwin to write about evolution would have been Erasmus, who was born in 1731. He published his theory of evolution around 1794.
How far back would you like to go with this?