'UNIFORMITARIANISM'
" The present is the key to the past ." The rate at which we observe
geological physical processes happening in the present , was claimed by
Charles Lyell to be the method by which we should interpret and apply
the past history of our planet . BUT , according to Stephen J Gould (
Paleontologist ) , Lyell ignored what the evidence demonstrates and relied upon his imagination .
Gould, Stephen Jay :
‘Charles Lyell was a lawyer by profession, and his book is one of the
most brilliant briefs published by an advocate Lyell relied upon two
bits of cunning to establish his uniformitarian views as the only true
geology. First, he set up a straw man to demolish. … In fact, the
catastrophists were much more empirically minded than Lyell. The
geologic record does seem to require catastrophes: rocks are fractured
and contorted; whole faunas are wiped out. To circumvent this literal
appearance, Lyell imposed his imagination upon the evidence. The
geologic record, he argued, is extremely imperfect and we must
interpolate into it what we can reasonably infer but cannot see. The
catastrophists were the hardnosed empiricists of their day, not the
blinded theological apologists.’
Gould, Stephen Jay, Professor of Paleontology and Geology at Harvard, in ‘Natural History’ Feb 1975 p.16.
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/02/science-owes-its-origins-to-act-of.html http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2012/01/literal-interpretation-of-bible-is-and.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/05/now-that-is-not-science.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/12/do-not-contradict-paradigm.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/11/bedtime-storytelling.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/06/word-of-greatest-scientist.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/02/real-myth-makers.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/07/get-closer-to-god.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/02/lyell-agenda.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/12/non-measurable-ramblings.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2012/02/what-do-leaders-say.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2012/01/deceptive-interpretation-of-evidence.html
No comments:
Post a Comment