I was just letting you know that your criticism of uniformitarianism is a criticism of lots of scientific fields, not just evolution. Old Earth and uniformitarianism were established before the theory of evolution even existed. The relative ages of most strata were determined before evolution.
Age measurements amount to massive finger pointing and circular reasoning. If a new archaeological discovery is made that does not fit within the parameters of evolutionary theory, the theory evolves (which is not unscientific in and of itself).
Most fossils are found in strata that has already been dated, and which contains that era's fossils. So wild discrepancies with the theory would not be possible for evolutionists to wave away. For example the Burgess Shale is dated middle Cambrian Era (about 550 million years). No about of messing about with dates, or the theory, would explain finding a mammal fossil, or a bird fossil, or a dinosaur fossil in the Burgess Shale. Finding any of these would immediately falsify the evolution of that species, and throw serious doubt on the evolution in general. That's quite a tight spot which the Theory of Evolution has put itself in. But despite a hundred years of work on the burgess shale no such example has been found.
And this goes for various other fossil beds around the world. No major discrepancies. This is what I am talking about high odds for. The fossil record is not random - if it were there would be the odd discrepancy. It is sorted, but sorted in a way that subsequent eras of life throughout time would produce. Until someone comes up with a better explaination for the lack of discrepancies, this is the best explaination.
Many of the more prominent Intelligent Design people accept these strata represent different eras of life on Earth, some also accept common descent of species.
At what time in history was there less diversity of living things than today? And how do you know?
No trace of mammals in the cambrian, no trace of reptiles in the cambrian, no trace of birds in the cambrian. No trace of land animals at all during the cambrian.
What non-living time indicators exist that correspond to your historical arrangement of the complexity of living things?
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/timescale.html
What assumptions (either axioms or logical extensions of them) are made when estimating the geological changes that have occurred during Earth's history?
How would possible cataclysmic events effect your model of predicted historical patterns and events?
Cataclysmic events such as volcanoes? meteor impacts? they leave evidence if that's what you mean.
How are your predictions more reliable than the ability to predict future weather patterns?
It's more about accuracy than reliability. I am not aware of any geological predictions. I am not interested enough in geology to find out.
The lack of a logical connection between more fundamental axioms implies that evolutionary theory itself is axiomatic. I cannot argue against a premise when there is none. This is what evolutionist hypocritically accuse creationists of.
Name two of these fundamental axioms so that I can see the lack of a logical connection between them for myself.
We know for certain that time does not flow at the same rate when measured at different velocities. So when you claim the earth or universe is a certain age (always stated as fact) where is the measurement valid?
On Earth and within our solar system. Billions of years of radiodecay have occured. This is what the measurements show. Relativity is beside the point - it doesn't matter how much time has passed relative to somewhere else in the universe, just on Earth.
What parts of the universe are older or younger?
I am younger than the Earth.
How much variation is there? .02%? 100,000%? If you admit that the universe did not always exist in its present form, what effect did the formation have on the time indicators we now use to measure the age of the universe and earth?
There is no known way to significantly alter the radiodecay rate. I recall that a change in the radiodecay rate would leave noticable effects, although I cannot remember what those changes are.
"Billions of years of radiodecay have occured. This is what the measurements show."
Some of the measurements. C14 measurements of fossils, coal, and diamonds show the opposite. The measurement of Helium escape from Zircon crystals indicate that the radioactive decay occurred quicker than the radioisotope measurements indicate.
I agree that certain measurements show the earth to be very old. But also certain measurements show the earth to be very young. All to often, in textbooks and in popular media, only the measurements showing the earth to be old are used, and they pretend as if they are the only measurements in existance and they all agree.