There is no 'proof' in science. You only have theories which can explain all currently known observations, and those which don't. And the theories which expla

There is no 'proof' in science. You only have theories which can explain all currently known observations, and those which don't. And the theories which explain all known observations tend to have _predictive power_, which means that you can predict the outcome of some experiment or event using the theory and then verify the prediction through observation. Even a prediction, however, doesn't "prove" the theory. Even a thousand or a million predictions don't. There's always a possibility, no matter how slight, that it was all one giant coincidence, and some future observation will throw everything into chaos. All of that said -- the preponderance of the evidence-- and not just Hutton's observations but carbon dating and biology and chemistry, etc, etc, all strongly suggest the same interpretation, and one would have to have an astoundingly good reason for believing anything else. Everything about the impossibility of proof that applies to our current understanding of "deep time" applies a million fold for any other theory which almost certainly lacks any explanatory or predictive power at all.