The Four Corners

And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. (Genesis 1:9)

Much like Pangea.

 'And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth,' (Revelation 7)

 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth. (Isaiah 11)

Much like Pangea: 

http://www.ncgeology.com/images_Eno_interactive/images_geologic_principles/Pangea_enoRiverPub_24.png

The bible and current science disagree with regard to the date of the break up of Pangea:

 And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan. (Genesis 10:25)

Although the Tower of Babel is written of in chapter 11, it appears to be either before or when the earth divided. According to science, the earth divided much longer ago. 

 'The ages of Earth and Moon rocks and of meteorites are measured by the decay of long-lived radioactive isotopes of elements that occur naturally in rocks and minerals and that decay with half lives of 700 million to more than 100 billion years to stable isotopes of other elements.'

http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html

An element that undergoes radioactive decay at a constant rate would radioactive decay at a constant rate irrespective of what other element/s it was among, and the state - solid, liquid or gas - of the element would make no difference to the rate of decay. It would decay from the point of formation of the element. Uranium cannot be used to measure the age of rocks. Dating techniques involving uranium can probably estimate the age of the uranium. 'Uranium 238 would have been undergoing radioactive decay to thorium 234 in gas, thorium 234 would have been undergoing radioactive decay to protactinium 234 in gas..

I reckon 'the youngest' uranium on earth may give a clue regarding the universe.

Carbon dating could reasonably be used for age comparison (if it is honestly worked on) provided it is acknowledged that decay rate is not constant and - more important - the production of Carbon 14 in the atmosphere would not have been constant, with both the atmospheric condition at the time, and altitude, being factors with regard to the variation. Honest carbon dating would require calculating the likely Carbon 14 production for each year (may be possible) and taking other factors into account. It may result in a few possible results, for which there may be another reason to suggest one.

'The measurements show that the C14 activity of atmospheric CO2 has not been entirely constant in the past but has varied by several percent.'

 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/JZ070i023p05937/abstract 

A 7% variation would give an error of thousands of years bearing in mind the half life of C14 - which is also not constant:

'As the researchers pored through published data on specific isotopes, they found disagreement in the measured decay rates – odd for supposed physical constants.

Checking data collected at Brookhaven National Laboratory on Long Island and the Federal Physical and Technical Institute in Germany, they came across something even more surprising: long-term observation of the decay rate of silicon-32 and radium-226 seemed to show a small seasonal variation. The decay rate was ever so slightly faster in winter than in summer.'

http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/breaking/2010/08/23/the-strange-case-of-solar-flares-and-radioactive-elements

That might explain why 'Scientists have found Arctic rocks that may preserve the earliest remnants of Earth.' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-10941026

 'It is suggested that the effective quasi-free electron density near the implanted ions in different metal host materials may play an important role in 7Be EC decay rate variation in addition to the electronic affinity and crystal structure of different host materials.'

http://iopscience.iop.org/0256-307X/27/1/012301/

I would suggest that other factors - for example direct sunlight and the sea - might have an effect. 

'Until 410 million years ago, the area of land now recognised as Scotland was separated from England by an ocean wider than the present-day North Atlantic - the Iapetus Ocean. When the two halves of Britain, which were part of separate larger continental land masses, began to drift towards each other, so the Iapetus Ocean began to close inexorably. The seaway between the converging continents narrowed until they collided and mountains were squeezed up in place of the vanished ocean. The two ancient continents, originally on opposite sides of the vast ocean, were now joined along a line known as the Iapetus Suture which runs almost parallel to Hadrian's Wall.'

http://www.snh.org.uk/publications/on-line/geology/scotland/continents.asp

As inaccurate carbon dating cannot be used for 410 million years, and other forms of radiometric dating appear to be basically fraud; the 410 million years should be discounted. As to whether the break up of Pangea was many millions of years ago or more recently, both the position of the border and the very different culture would point to the bible as more likely.

The Malvern Line would indicate a probability that Wales was previously not attached to England.

'In the Welsh borderland the Cambrian is exposed in small inliers that lie along the sporadically active fault complexes of the Church Stretton (Fig. 3.12) and the Malvern (Fig 3.11) lineaments.'

Page 39: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=-6gqvAbdS-MC&pg=PA38&lpg=PA38&dq=malvern+lineament&source=bl&ots=cxBTMtUsZ4&sig=akULqAJfKFlRURIKPyei2EMMHrw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=g6dNUZDMEoaQOOm0gYAE&sqi=2&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=malvern%20lineament&f=false 

 The earth's crust might have cooled.