Final answer:
Uniformitarianism and catastrophism suggest different rates of geological change; uniformitarianism implies a slow, gradual process, while catastrophism suggests rapid, catastrophic events. So, the statement is true.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question asks whether uniformitarianism and catastrophism as applied to interpreting Earth history suggest different rates of change. The answer is True. These two theories represent contrasting views on the earth's geological development. Uniformitarianism, as discussed by Charles Lyell, is the concept that the same geological processes we see today have been working in much the same way throughout Earth's history, implying a slow and steady rate of change. On the other hand, catastrophism, which was supported by Georges Cuvier, suggests that Earth's features were formed by quick, catastrophic events such as floods, earthquakes, and other natural disasters, implying a more abrupt rate of change.
According to uniformitarianism, the environment we see today has been shaped by long-standing, continuous processes like erosion and sedimentation, which have occurred at a consistent rate over time. Catastrophism, however, proposes that there were periods in Earth's history when rapid changes occurred due to catastrophic events. This viewpoint would necessitate a shorter geological timeline to account for the dramatic alterations to Earth's landscape.