What interpretations of Ayers Rock are given by evolutionary scientists?

Answer 1

Ayer's Rock/Uluru is a sandstone formation in the centre of a desert.

Rocks are the area of geologists, not biologists. Evolutionary scientists wouldn't care either way about it (unless it happened to contain some new fossils or biological research material).

Answer 2

Ayers Rock, known by the Australian indigenous people as Uluru, is a large sandstone monolith in the southern part of the Northern Territory, central Australia. It is not truly a monolith, but is rather known as an inselberg, meaning "island mountain", a hard rock remaining after the original mountain range was eroded away.

For the creationists understanding these earth formations is easy with the world flood in mind and the explanation cited in The Bible on how the water came down and how it moved terrain with the water weight. Creationists have a solid case for Ayers Rock being around 6000 years old if one approaches their evidence with an open mind, but their view tends to be scorned by many sectors of the scientific world.

For the evolutionist there are a few theories but all have to do with the tectonic plates forming landscapes with many millions of years, as opposed to the "thousands of years" theory favoured by Creationists. Evolutionists tend to be more concerned with animal and plant organisms, rather than rocks, mountains and soil, a field usually studied by geologists.

It is interesting to note that evolutionists and non-Creationist geologists cannot agree on the origin of Ayers Rock/Uluru. It is a phenomenon that cannot be explained.