This article argues against uniformitarianism, the dominant geological theory asserting that Earth's processes have been consistent throughout time. The author, a creationist, highlights three major disagreements with uniformitarianism: conflicting worldviews (naturalistic vs. creationist), differing interpretations of geological data (especially concerning catastrophic events like the Ice Age and fossil evidence), and varying approaches to biblical interpretation of Earth's age. The paper critiques uniformitarian explanations of phenomena like fossil mammoths, continental drift, and mountain formation, suggesting that these are based on unproven assumptions and inadequate data, ultimately advocating for a more open-minded approach that considers alternative—and potentially creationist—explanations for geological history. The central purpose is to challenge the authority of uniformitarian geology and its inherent naturalistic philosophy by presenting counterarguments and highlighting the uncertainties within the field.