Radiocarbon dating age of the earth
The great debate was won by the uniformitarians, so much so that the degree of gradualism was overstated and the importance of catastrophes was unduly minimized.The modern period has been marked by an enormous expansion of the detailed knowledge of the geological history of the Earth and the processes that have acted during that history.
It became clear that there had been significant changes in the Earth's topography over time and that these changes could neither be accounted for by natural processes operating during the brief nor by the postulated Noachian flood.Hutton and Lyell, who held that the history of Earth was dominated by slow relatively uniform changes in an Earth with a static over all history.During the early part of this period there was a considerable amount of activity by runs from AD 1850 to the present.The rise of science produced a major change in attitude.In the pre-scientific world view the issue of the age of the Earth was a theological question.The account in Genesis is replete with miracles that do not stand up under rational analysis.
This did not matter; the theological perspective did not require physical rationalization.
Ussher accepted the Biblical account at face value, relying on the Biblical genealogies and on extant historical records.
He implicitly assumed that the world was created much as it is now.
The selections and comments here are not a complete exposition of the works of the authors mentioned; rather they were chosen to illustrate and exemplify changing perspectives over time.
In Europe the issue of the age of the Earth was not a serious one prior to the rise of science; the history of the Earth was assumed to be accounted for in Genesis.
In this period a number of comprehensive cosmogonies were proposed.