Case for a Young Earth

Users who are viewing this thread

SgtSpike

Active Member
Messages
807
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
Ok, you all knew this topic had to come up sooner or later. :D

Here's a list of 10 reasons why the earth must be young. Some of these may not be solid arguments, and you could probably find immediate proofs against them, but I challenge anyone to try and refute all 10 of them. ;)

The amount of cosmic dust that would have been expected to have accumulated on the earth (or moon) after billions of years is not present.

The abundance of micrometeroids (dust particles in space) by no means harmonizes with evolutionary dates for the earth and the rest of the universe. If the earth and the universe are as old as evolutionists believe, there should be no micrometeoroids remaining.

Comets decay, or break up, as they pass the sun, but they are not replenished. If evolutionary dates for the earth and our solar system were accurate, comets would not exist in the solar system.

The spin of the earth on its axis continues to diminish gradually. Based on the present rate, if the earth began turning billions of years ago, it would have been turning so fast that it would have become flattened.

Decay on the earth’s magnetic field has been documented since 1835, and Magsat (an American space satellite) verified this decay. At the present rate of decay, twenty thousand years ago the earth’s magnetic field would have produced heat intense enough to liquefy the earth; one million years ago, the heat would have been enough to vaporize it.

If the earth were billions of years old, there should be more helium and oxygen in the atmosphere than there is. The hydrogen concentration in the atmosphere supports a young earth rather than one billions of years old.

Erosion gradually wears down land, but the earth still has sharp geographical features. If the earth is billions of years old, the effects of erosion should be more pronounced.

If earth’s horizontal crustal layers of rock formed slowly and if at the same time the earth was undergoing erosion for billions of years, the strata should not show the distinct layering that we see.

Pressure that causes oil wells to be “gushers” should have dissipated if the earth were more than about 10,000 years old.

Sediments in the ocean are only a few thousand feet thick at their thickest. If the ocean were as old as evolutionists claim, the ocean floor should have a layer of sediment about 100 miles thick and the continents should have been worn away long ago.

The population of the earth doubles regularly. If the world were billions of years old, the present population would be astounding, and there would not be room on the earth for all the people.

We would expect to find records of extremely ancient civilizations if the earth is as old as evolutionists claim, but no records of extremely ancient civilizations exist. Even Earth’s oldest writings support the idea of an earth that is only thousands of years old; there is no hint in them that the earth has existed for more than some thousands of years.
 
  • 70
    Replies
  • 2K
    Views
  • 0
    Participant count
    Participants list

Tim

Having way too much fun
Valued Contributor
Messages
13,518
Reaction score
43
Tokenz
111.11z
Looking for all 10 to be debunked though. :)

The amount of cosmic dust that would have been expected to have accumulated on the earth (or moon) after billions of years is not present.
Explain to me how you want this debunked when you aren't giving all the information... what data is this question based on? Where are your starting facts?

It is estimated that 40,000 tons/year fall to the earth. at 109 tons/day it would accumulate to 3 inches of dust covering the face of the earth over the lifetime of the planet. That's assuming that it fell at a constant rate and landed on stable unchanging ground. They actually measured the depth of space dust in deep oceans and it's consistent with the 40,000 tons/year figure.
 

SgtSpike

Active Member
Messages
807
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
I guess carbon dating is all a load of lies then.
Yes - we have no idea how much carbon was in the air 1000 years ago (let alone longer), so how can we say that carbon dating is accurate when we don't know how much carbon those plants and animals had in them to begin with?

Explain to me how you want this debunked when you aren't giving all the information... what data is this question based on? Where are your starting facts?

It is estimated that 40,000 tons/year fall to the earth. at 109 tons/day it would accumulate to 3 inches of dust covering the face of the earth over the lifetime of the planet. That's assuming that it fell at a constant rate and landed on stable unchanging ground. They actually measured the depth of space dust in deep oceans and it's consistent with the 40,000 tons/year figure.
Actually, that one has been debunked by Christians themselves (found this out after doing some research on it).

And I don't have sources for any of these. Just looking for proofs against them, if you can find them.
 

All Else Failed

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,205
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z
There's actually lots of evidence for a world wide flood, such as fish bones on top of mountains, etc.
lol

have you ever heard of plate tectonics? Do you know how mountains are formed?


Mountains come about when earth's plates collide and shift upon each other, thrusting rock and earth up, creating peaks. That is why you find sea animal fossils on tops of mountains, because the rock on top of mountains now was under the sea at one point.
 

SgtSpike

Active Member
Messages
807
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
lol

have you ever heard of plate tectonics? Do you know how mountains are formed?


Mountains come about when earth's plates collide and shift upon each other, thrusting rock and earth up, creating peaks. That is why you find sea animal fossils on tops of mountains, because the rock on top of mountains now was under the sea at one point.
Well yeah, I know that. But these are newer fish, by carbon dating/evolutionary lineage/any other form of dating you want to use. I'll have to find the source for that.
 
78,875Threads
2,185,392Messages
4,959Members
Back
Top