Geomagnetic polarity during the last 5 million years (Pliocene and Quaternary, late Cenozoic Era).
Dark areas denote periods where the polarity matches today's normal polarity; light areas denote periods where that polarity is reversed.
Third, creationists ignore the evidence and deny that [X] exists altogether or assert that belief in a Young Earth is based on faith, not science. These ages weren't just made up — or, worse, accepted to "give evolution enough time".
A geomagnetic reversal is a change in a planet's magnetic field such that the positions of magnetic north and magnetic south are interchanged, while geographic north and geographic south remain the same.The Earth's field has alternated between periods of normal polarity, in which the direction of the field was the same as the present direction, and reverse polarity, in which the field was the opposite. The time spans of chrons are randomly distributed with most being between 0.1 and 1 with an average of 450,000 years.This article collects evidences that place a lower limit on the age of the Universe beyond the 6,000 to 10,000 years asserted by most Young Earth creationists (YECs) and the literalist Ussher chronology.All of this evidence supports deep time: the idea, considered credible by scientists since the early 1800s, that the Earth (and the Universe) is millions These limits usually take the form: "Because we observe [X], which occurs at rate [Y], the universe must be at least [Z] years old".There are three standard creationist responses: First, creationists assert that current rates (Y) are different than past rates.
It is possible that these rates changed — but under uniformitarianism, which is necessary for science to function, we must assume that rates did not change unless there is evidence for this change.
It met with widespread rejection, largely because the mechanism he suggested was inadequate -- the continents supposedly plowed slowly through the denser oceanic crust under the influence of gravitational and rotational forces.
Interest was revived in the early 1950s with the rise of the new science of paleomagnetism, which seemed to provide strong support for continental drift.
It is concluded that the fundamental tenets of plate tectonics might be wrong.
The idea of large-scale continental drift has been around for some 200 years, but the first detailed theory was proposed by Alfred Wegener in 1912.
It's just one of the tricks that have been used to make the work a little more precise. I believe he has confused the use of index fossils with evolution.