Why don't we hear more about the assumption of uniformity as a way to understand dating issues?
It seems obvious that the laws of this earth have changed since Eden . Laws today revolve around death and the cycle from decay to life. In Eden there was no decay, no death. There was no rain until the flood. The Bible indicates that the earth is suffering under three curses, which I interpret as three times God changed fundamental laws. If that is the case there is no way that we can extrapolate back to origins with any certainty. Given today's laws millions of years are probably accurage. But if we grant that the fundamental laws have changed this would throw in question the results from today's research.
So why do we argue and try and resolve the difficulties that science brings to the debate? Let's just agree with them given their assumptions but at the same time say, "We come with a different set of assumptions therefore we will come to a different set of conclusions." It is on the level of assumptions that we should begin the debate. What do you think?