1) One test of the age of the Earth that DOESN'T rely on uniformitarian assumptions is the large degree of congruence between different dating methodologies. A non-uniformitarian situation should not be expected to produce congruencies therefore that is evidence for a uniformitarian view.
2) Astronomical measurements look back in time - because of the time taken for light to reach the Earth. We can also examine evidence of the past to see if it is compatible with uniformitarian views. Both these techniques greatly extend te range.
3) It DIDN'T say "x billion years ago", those words were not in my post. Therefore all you are doing is proving that you are a liar.
4) We are dealing with logic here, since any demand that logically entails victory for one side regardless fo the merit of the cases is grossly unfair. The fact is that on thsoe grounds Faith's demand is unfair while the assumptions you object to are - in themselves - neutral. In short you are trying to manipulate the rules by demanding either a concession that guarantees victory for your side or alternatively excluding valid evidence against your views.
The mere fact that you to resort to such blatant attempts to cheat speaks volumes.
4) There's no reason why animals shoudln't live faster and breed quicker other than the uniformitarian assumptions you supposedly reject. Speeding up those would naturally allow faster evolution.
5) THe consequnce of animals not breeding in excess of the replacements needed would be that the species could never spread. By defintiion its numbers would be at best constant. Worse, the speces will be more vulnerable to disaster. If the reproductive rate is constant then the species is subject to decline through accident and disaster, leading to extinction. If the species takes significant losses it cannto recover becuase that in itself demands a reproductive excess. A species without a reproductive excess is therefroe locked into a static popuilation even under absolutely ideal conditions - and a declining populaton in a more realistic situation.
5) I've offered rational support for uniformitarianism - and given examples. And they do not rely on assuiming uniformitarianism. YOur objection therefore is false.