You Can't Verify of Falsify Historical Sciencces

So James Hutton pondered the angular unconformity at Siccar Point and concluded that the earth must be very ancient to account for it. He As he interpreted it, the lower section was laid down horizontally and then at some point titlted vertically, after which the upper section was deposited horizontally on top of it. I forget his reasoning but to his thinking that must have taken a very long time. And that concludion overturned the biblical time frame that had more or less prevailed until then. It took a while for his interpretation to be accepted but when it was it became as dogmatically fixed as any religious doctrine3. And then along came radiometric dating to clinch it.

The only way to argue against an interpretation is with other interpretations. There is no empirical scientific way to challenge it. It can't be falsified although that is supposed to be a tenet of science. And neithedr can radiometric dating. It has its logic for sure but since we can't go back in time to test it, just as we can't test Hutton's interpretation of the angular unconformity, it gets established as dogma and that is that.

that's how eveolution got established too. It's all a mental fabrication, a house of cards, but since you can't test it, verify it or falsify it, even if it's a great bamboozle, which it is, we can't prove it. We can only try to establish another explanation that fits the facts better.