Geologic Paradigms: Uniformitarianism vs Catastrophism
Charlotte R. Jones
PHSC 210, Elements of Earth Science
David Gilhousen
Liberty University
Geologic Paradigms: Uniformitarianism vs Catastrophism
Introduction
When discussing the geologic paradigms of Uniformitarianism and catastrophism the real question at the heart is twofold. First how the landscape of the Earth we now see came to be and then when it all happened. The debate can go deeper into whom or what began the process, however, the primary question asked by uniformitarianism and catastrophism is the how and when.
Old Earth View
Proponents of “old Earth view” believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God and believe the Genesis creation account is a historical narrative and not poetic expression. While Young Earth supporters believe a “plain reading” of the English translation of Genesis 1 necessitates belief that God created the world in six, 24-hour days some six to ten thousand years ago, old-Earth view supporters believe that textual and syntactic distinctions of the original Hebrew advocate six long epochs of time. Old-Earth view supporters oppose that a verbatim reading of the Biblical creation accounts in Hebrew provide evidences supporting a prolonged creation “day”. This view sates that the “biblical Hebrew has a very limited vocabulary (approximately 3,100 words) compared to the English vocabulary (estimated to be 1,000,000 words). Hebrew words often have several literal meanings. Linguistic scholars acknowledge the Hebrew word yôm (translated “day” in English) has several literal meanings: a period of daylight, 12-hour day, 24-hour day, time, period of time with unspecified duration, and epoch of time. While modern English has numerous words to describe a long time-span, no word in biblical Hebrew adequately denotes a finite epoch of time other than yôm.” (Green, 2012) The old-Earth view supporter holds the view of uniformitarianism thought they hold that there have been catastrophic events these events do not support a young-Earth view.
Young-Earth View
Supporters of the young-Earth view also believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God and that the Genesis creation account is a historical narrative and not poetic expression. Where the two camps diverge is that young-Earth view supporters believe that the Earth was created in six literal days and that the creation week consists of “consecutive 24-hour periods adding up to six calendar days. Allowing for gaps in Old Testament genealogies, this means that universe was created between 10,000 and 20,000 years ago. YECs also hold that geological data, including the fossil record, should be understood in light of the worldwide flood depicted in the account of Noah and the ark.” (Koperski, 2006)
Uniformitarianism and Catastrophism. Both uniformitarianism and catastrophism endeavor to explain the geological transformation and changes the earth experienced from its early stages to present day. Both ideologies believe that natural events shaped our world. Both of these views are held by bible believing Christians. While not all uniformitarians believe in the flood of Noah, some do.
Uniformitarianism vs Catastrophism The differences in uniformitarianism and catastrophism lies within the method of the aforementioned natural events that shaped our world. According to a statement by Berkeley University, uniformitarians hold the belief of “James Hutton” of the 1790’s who “argued that the Earth was transformed not by unimaginable catastrophes but by imperceptibly slow changes, many of which we can see around us today. Rain erodes mountains, while molten rock pushes up to create new ones.” (Berkeley University, 2014) In an opposing view, The Johns Hopkins Press published a paper quoting “Benjamin DeWitt” when he encountered 64 different varieties of stones in the 1790’s in Lake Superior saying, “It is almost impossible to believe that so great a variety of stones should be naturally formed in one place….they must, therefore, have been conveyed there by some extraordinary means. I am inclined to believe that this may have been effected by some mighty convulsion of nature, such as an earthquake or eruption, and perhaps this vast lake may be considered as one of those great “fountains of the deep” which were broken up when the Earth was deluged with water, thereby producing that confusion and disorder in the composition of its surface which evidently seems to exist” (Davidson, 1969)
Conclusion
There is ample scientific evidence that would support either view depending on the views of those seeking it. I believe that the biggest obstacle for scientific discovery is scientific bias. We are all looking to prove our own theories and disprove those we oppose. There is room for a biblical worldview within uniformitarianism as well as catastrophism. The bulk of the supporters from one camp or the other may disagree yet the facts remain there is. None of us are members of a master race because of our view on this topic. There have been both geniuses and simpletons who have held both of the beliefs discussed in this paper. Holding a particular position does not make us innately superior or inferior to others. Remembering this fact could lead us to extraordinary theological and scientific discoveries..
References
Berkeley University. (2014). Understanding Evolution. Retrieved from evolution.berkeley.edu: www.evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/history_12
Davidson, A. A. (1969). Caastrophism and Peale's Mammoth. American Quarterly, 620-629.
Erwin, D. H. (2010). Evolutionary Uniformitarianism . Elsevier.
Green, J. W. (2012, August 02). A biblical case for Old-Earth Creationism. Retrieved from God and Science: http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth/old_earth_creationism.html
Koperski, J. (2006). Science, Religion, and Society. Retrieved from SVSU.edu: http://www.svsu.edu/~koperski/Creationism.htm
Nick Marriner, C. S. (2010). Geoscience meetsthe four hoursemen? Tracking the rise of neocatastrophism. Elsevier.
