An old earth fits with evolutionary theory of millions of years. A young earth fits with the Bible account of a six day creation followed by about 6,000 years of life on earth.
Which is correct?
It's Important to check out the claims of scientists who say that life came into existence through a Big Bang followed by a long process of evolution over millions of years. If what they say is true, it will be backed up by hard evidence. In the end, we should only believe what is true. So lets look at some key claims and see if they point to a young or old earth age.
The sun has been shrinking at about 0.04% every century which isn't a lot if the earth is young. But it means the sun would have been touching the earth about 30 million years ago!
These are said to take millions of years to form but under the Lincoln Memorial in Washington D.C. they had grown to nearly 2 metres in less than 50 years. And this is just one of many examples.
The moon is receding away from the earth at about 5cm every year. Therefore the moon cannot have been orbiting the earth for millions of years.
Helium has been accumulating in our atmosphere at a known rate. The problem is that there is only enough helium for this accumulation process to have gone on for about 10,000 years!
Studies have shown that the earths population grows at 2% annually. Even if you reduced that to 0.5% to allow for wars and disasters etc. it would mean that if mankind had been on the earth for a million years, as evolution claims, then population numbers would be represented by 10 with 21,000 zeros after it!!! This is quite impossible considering there aren't even that many electrons in the universe. If you trace today's population backwards, it began around 4,400 years ago... which is around the time the Bible says Noah's Flood occurred!
For evolution to happen, genetic information must be added to the DNA molecule. All are agreed on that. However, there is not one single documented case of this ever having happened. It is believed that over millions of years mutations happened as new information was added and that through these mutations, we gradually evolved. The ironic thing is that while there have been some rare mutations in some animals (such as a calf being born with two heads) the mutations have not been beneficial. Even more significant is that fact that these mutations have not come from new information being added to the DNA molecule but from a loss of genetic information.
DINOSAURS AND HUMANS TOGETHER?
Evolution teaches that dinosaurs existed long, long lonnnnnng before man came onto the scene. But what would they say if footprints of man and dinosaur were found together? Here's what David Milne said.
In the Journal of Geological Education, Vol. 31, 1983, David H Milne and Steven D Schafersman tell us "Such an occurrence, if verified, would seriously disrupt conventional interpretations of biological and geological history [the belief in evolution] and would support the doctrine of creationism and catastrophism [ie. creation by God and world wide flood]."
Well, to the embarrassment of evolutionists, dinosaur and human footprints been found together in Mexico, New Mexico, Arizona, Missouri, Kentucky and Illinois - and other places as well.
The Creation Ex-Nihilo Technical Journal featured the picture below, on page 345 of Volume 12 (No 3) 1998 issue. Here is what the magazine had to say about this picture:
"There are many stories and legends of dragons, with descriptions fitting dinosaurs, supporting that man and dinosaur did in fact live together (supporting also a young age for the earth). Australian aboriginal folklore abounds with such stories, including references to plesiosaur-like creatures. Elders of the kuku Yalanji aboriginal tribe of Far North Queensland, Australia, relate stories of Yarru (or Yarrba), a creature which used to inhabit rain forest water holes. The painting in Figure 7 depicts a creature with features remarkably similar to a plesiosaur. It even shows an outline of the gastro-intestinal tract, indicating that these animals had been hunted and butchered."
Evolution teaches that given TIME and CHANCE, then changes can happen to existing life forms so that they eventually evolve into something different and more advanced. But with the rate the scientists change their minds, there is not much chance of that.
WHY DO THEY DO IT?
Why do evolutionists keep believing the unbelievable? A. Lunn answered this when he said, "Faith is the substance of fossils hoped for, the evidence of links unseen." (The Collapse of Evolution, by Dr. Scott Huse.) Evolutionists present the "theory" of evolution as a fact because believing this lie, helps them avoid the truth. But they will not be able to avoid it forever. There is a day of judgement.
"The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be know about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities - his eternal power and divine nature - have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts became darkened." (Romans 1:18-22)